http://ca.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2007-11-03T144657Z_01_COL199283_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-PAKISTAN-EMERGENCY-COL.XML
SLAMABAD (Reuters) - Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf imposed emergency rule on Saturday and deployed troops across the capital in a bid to reassert his flagging authority against political rivals and Islamist militants.
Nuclear-armed Pakistan's internal security has deteriorated sharply in recent months with a wave of suicide attacks by al Qaeda-inspired militants, including one that killed 139 people.
State-run Pakistan Television said General Musharraf, who is also chief of army staff, had suspended the constitution and declared an emergency. The move is expected to put off parliamentary elections due in January.
Witnesses said paramilitary troops were deployed at Pakistan Television and radio stations ahead of the announcement, which follows weeks of speculation that U.S. ally Musharraf might impose emergency rule or martial law.
Troops sealed off Constitution Avenue, the thoroughfare where the presidency building, the National Assembly and the Supreme Court are located.
Television channels also said that Supreme Court Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, whose earlier dismissal in March marked the beginning of a slide in Musharraf's popularity, had been told that his services were "no longer required."
Chaudhry had been reinstated in July.
Musharraf, who seized power in a 1999 coup, was awaiting a Supreme Court ruling on whether he was eligible to run for re-election last month while still army chief.
The court said on Friday it would reconvene on Monday and try to finish the case quickly, having earlier said it would take a break until November 12 -- just three days before Musharraf's current term is due to expire.
A senior security official told Reuters that Musharraf would seek approval for the move from the cabinet later, after which there were expectations he would address the nation.
The cabinet was due to start meeting at 10 a.m. EDT
About 139 people were killed on Oct 19 by an attempted suicide bomb assassination of opposition leader Benazir Bhutto during a procession through Karachi when she returned from eight years of self-imposed exile.
Bhutto's husband Asif Ali Zardari said she was already on a flight back to Pakistan from Dubai. He described Musharraf's move was "definitely not pleasant news."
"We're hoping to build institutions, not destroy them."
Before the announcement on emergency rule, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had told journalists traveling with her to Turkey that Washington opposed any authoritarian measures and wanted elections to go ahead.
"I think it would be quite obvious that the United States would not be supportive of extra-constitutional means," Rice said. "Pakistan needs to prepare for and hold free and fair elections."
Musharraf had said he would quit as army chief if he was given a second term, and he had allowed Bhutto back into Pakistan to lead her party into the national elections.
In London, a spokesman for former Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif said; "We feel it's a desperate attempt of a defeated dictator who has been exposed for what he is in the eyes of the world."
"He (Musharraf) feels the Supreme Court will not allow him to remain the president. That's why he has taken the decision," spokesman Nadir Chaudhri said,
Musharraf's troubles began in March when he suspended Supreme Court Justice Chaudhry on allegations of misconduct.
Critics accused him of trying to put pressure on the court not to block his re-election and Musharraf's popularity plummeted as lawyers rallied to support the top judge.
In July, after a week-long siege, Musharraf ordered troops to storm the Red Mosque in Islamabad to crush a Taliban-style movement based there.
At least 105 people were killed in the raid and a wave of deadly militant attacks and suicide bombings followed.
Originally posted by druidraviAnd ...your point is?
http://ca.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2007-11-03T144657Z_01_COL199283_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-PAKISTAN-EMERGENCY-COL.XML
[b]
SLAMABAD (Reuters) - Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf imposed emergency rule on Saturday and deployed troops across the capital in a bid to reassert his flagging authority against political rivals and Isl ...[text shortened]... d a wave of deadly militant attacks and suicide bombings followed.
[/b]
Originally posted by druidraviThe situation is deteriorating because Musharraf is a friend of the US and propped up by the US, which many of his critics don't really like.
Well situation is deteiorating day by day in Pakistan which has nukes . Is this going to be another Saddam in the making? . If you remember Saddam was once a friend of US.
However, Pakistani politics doesn't offer any alternative but US supporters - Bhutto is another supporter of the status quo with regards to the west, the military is too in hock to them, despite the military intelligence's dabblings in Afghanistan.
Originally posted by druidraviFine, well don't just post a news clipping and then expect us to comment on it. Are we suppose to guess what to say, or what your point is? Makes it easier for us to decipher what to comment on.
Well situation is deteiorating day by day in Pakistan which has nukes . Is this going to be another Saddam in the making? . If you remember Saddam was once a friend of US.
So whats the India government saying bout this? Or do they have to ask their buddies the Chinese what to think and say. There have been recent stories of India, Russia and the Chinese cozying up to form a new power bloc in the area.
Originally posted by SMSBear716Well all my points are mentioned in the article itself. Some articles are self-evident . Like let's say a suicide bombing or an earthquake etc. What is happening in Pakistan is very worrisome as it has been gradually moving more and more from democracy .
Fine, well don't just post a news clipping and then expect us to comment on it. Are we suppose to guess what to say, or what your point is? Makes it easier for us to decipher what to comment on.
So whats the India government saying bout this? Or do they have to ask their buddies the Chinese what to think and say. There have been recent stories of India, Russia and the Chinese cozying up to form a new power bloc in the area.
You seem to be still in a cold war phyche . India and China are not buddies and regarding the power blocs there are various theories going around India_America_Israel , India_Japan_US_Australia , India-China_Russia , India_Brazil_Argentina??(I don't remember the third country) .Regardless there are no actual alliances or something only national interests involved .
On topic : As mentioned in the OP Musharaff dismissed Chief Justice of Supreme Court , constitution is on hold , martial law established . Basically this is shaping into a Dictatorship led by Musharaff . While that is problematic by itself , he doesn't have popular backing and has even lost the Islamic radicals support . He has survived various assassination attempts .
But think about this situation what if an assassination attempt succeeds. He has wiped out most of the opposition . Who will fill the power vacum then . Islamic extremist elements?. There is a real danger of a nuke or 2 going missing in the chaos .
Still I hope the US troops which are based in Pakistan have some sort of contigensy plan for such a situation . Like quick commando options to secure all the nuclear sites .
Originally posted by druidraviThe General came to power because the old president tried to kill him basically, and then 911 happened
Well situation is deteiorating day by day in Pakistan which has nukes . Is this going to be another Saddam in the making? . If you remember Saddam was once a friend of US.
He is stuck between a rock and hard place...I honestly feel sorry for the guy.
On the one hand he has the West on his case and on the other his people.
A lot of the issues over the weekend stem from the Judicisury / law courts. Some off you may have remember that recent Red Mosque event.
Well when thoses "known terrorists" where sent the court, the Judges in their "wisdom" deemed that the General was not allowed to arrest them, and hence they where freed.
This in itself was wrong, because they should have been tried and sentenced. But the Judges has issues with the General and hence at any givern opp will try to screw him over.
And that basically is why the issue has blown up, in that the Judicary is being completely inflexiable and not looking at the bigger picture rightly or wrongly.
In most mordern democraies (the judicary) may not agree with whats beening said by the Goverment (such as USA / G Bay), but their is a way of explaining this and working things out.
Pakistan is only 70 years old at the end of the day, so its a new country.
If you look at the history of most nations, after 70 years can you honestly say they are not going through issues
So bascially, thats why he has had to do what he has done.
To compare him to a mass murder like Saddam is incorrect and completely wrong.
Originally posted by RSMA1234@RSMA1234 : I am saying there is a potential that he could in future become a problematic person like Saddam , if for short-term political gain the international community supports him .
The General came to power because the old president tried to kill him basically, and then 911 happened
He is stuck between a rock and hard place...I honestly feel sorry for the guy.
On the one hand he has the West on his case and on the other his people.
A lot of the issues over the weekend stem from the Judicisury / law courts. Some off you may ha ...[text shortened]... has done.
To compare him to a mass murder like Saddam is incorrect and completely wrong.
But he is bad for Pakistan. The move to democracy is getting further step back by his decisions. Judiciary is an important part of a government. It is a checks and balance system that keeps the executive from getting too much power . Remember the old adage power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Pakistan is an delicate situation right now with it fighting the Taliban it created. The tribal areas are starting to become independent and Islamic extremism is on rise. The red mosque incident has only triggered the already unstable situation. Pakistan needs dialogue within itself to address the growing contradictions within itself .
I feel democracy is a way in that direction . It might not be the solution but it is a way to find the solution . I was happy when the lawyers protests erupted in Pakistan as it was showing some grass root democracy at work .
About Musharaff he has lost the support of common Pakistanis and the Islamic elements as well. Even the educated's are disillusioned with him . He is surviving purely from army support and US support .
Dictators are always paranoid about losing power . When the kurds turned on Saddam he brutally supressed it . What is to prevent another such incident happening in Pakistan .
Most importantly what happens if Musharaff suddenly dies . There is no other person with power in Pakistan . Who knows what happens in the resulting chaos to fill the power vacum . Democracy is sustaining , dictatorship is not. A democratic Pakistan is in best interests of both Pakistan and India .
Originally posted by druidraviI donlt really see whats your saying, Saddam was a completely different type of person.
@RSMA1234 : I am saying there is a potential that he could in future become a problematic person like Saddam , if for short-term political gain the international community supports him .
But he is bad for Pakistan. The move to democracy is getting further step back by his decisions. Judiciary is an important part of a government. It is a checks , dictatorship is not. A democratic Pakistan is in best interests of both Pakistan and India .
As far as I'm awear, the General came to power in a bloodless coup, does not go around pruging oppenats (killing them off like Saddam), does not start wars of agression, trys to encourage growth and international developement etc
I think you are comparing apples with Pears to be honest.
I personally don't think democray can exists in the theoritical way that I think you describe. Whilst the Judiciary should act in the you have writtern, I again think that maybe you are looking at this in a theorical way. The reality is just not the case. They most work with the goverment and try to come to solutions, not always showing negativivty as they have done.
It takes two to tango as they say.
The tribal areas have always been indepenant, its impossible to govern them. Every nation has contridictions, India is the largest demoracy in the world, but can a low caste Indian share a train cabin with a high caste one for example ?
I'm not having a dig, just pointing out that in every nations this happens.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying what he has done is correct, merely pointing out the reason for it as far as I can see. Power is something which everyone (once they have tasted) wants to keep, so in effect I'm not surprised.
I'm just merely pointing out to you, that the General is in a bad place, he has to please the West by going after Al Q, please his people, develop democray more.....so givern everything that has happened, I feel he has been quick restrainted, at the end of the day, it could have been much more worse
Democracy is a good start, but I also would add understanding and a solution to Kashimer issue which will always be a bone of contention as we both know
Originally posted by weirdboyI can see why people think that.
Power is everything. I dont think its fair to compare Musharaff to Saddam, but i do believe he is not too far from going down the same road. Like mentioned earlier Musharaff is def a dictator in the making.
But I donlt think the whole picture is being looked at
As mentioned the guy only came to power because of the attempted killing off him by not allowing his plane to land and then 911 happened and the focus of the world is rightly or wrongly on Pakistan.
So its a very difficult place to be, if he leaves office, I honestly don't think their is anyone else that is has the capicity to do what must be done in the "fight against terror"......they why I guess the US etc are not asking him to step down as president...they do need him.
Bhutto is just a laugh in my eyes, she is not strong enough for this to move forward.
Originally posted by druidraviIf Pakistan with its nukes falls into the hands of the islamists/Jihadists, then the security situation in the region and indeed the world as a whole will suffer a severe blow.
http://ca.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2007-11-03T144657Z_01_COL199283_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-PAKISTAN-EMERGENCY-COL.XML
[b]
SLAMABAD (Reuters) - Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf imposed emergency rule on Saturday and deployed troops across the capital in a bid to reassert his flagging authority against political rivals and Isl d a wave of deadly militant attacks and suicide bombings followed.
[/b]
The only thing worse than Musharraf's authoritarian regime would be a totalitarian fascist Islamist/Jihadist regime.
Originally posted by weirdboyWhat do you mean a dictator in the making? In the Making???
Power is everything. I dont think its fair to compare Musharaff to Saddam, but i do believe he is not too far from going down the same road. Like mentioned earlier Musharaff is def a dictator in the making.
The man was a dictator from the moment he staged the coup...