Musharaff imposes emergency rule

Originally posted by ivanhoe
If 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.

The only thing worse than Musharraf's authoritarian regime would be a totalitarian fascist Islamist/Jihadist regime.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Such a result will be the logical consequence of incessant Western meddling in the Middle East.

Originally posted by druidravi
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.

Originally posted by ivanhoe
"Is this going to be another Saddam in the making?"

No.

I can't quite fathom what he's up to.
The business about him seeking longevity for his Presidency is all very well, but something just doesn't add up.

His life has been spent in service to his country, and there can be no doubt about is stance which suggests he truly desires to contribute.

In many ways, this is not disimilar to the events of 2002, when pretty much the same situation arose.
Back then he denounced terrorism and made friends with America, and, as far as I can see, he has acted on his intentions and commitments. in that respect.
In this instance, the difference is that he can't pull the same rabbit from the hat, and so he would have known that the moment he acted he would draw condemnation from his allies such as America, and Condi was, forher part, very prompt in saying he should take a different tack and be equally prompt in doing so.

Once the brinksmanship had died down, we would have found out either way, say, back end of next week....but the Bhutto/Judiciary planned protest march on Friday will likely result in many deaths, and with them, the last vestiges of justification, for imposing martial law.

My opinion only.

Musharraf Sets No Date to End Emergency Rule
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/12/world/asia/12pakistan.html?_r=1&pagewanted=2&ref=asia&oref=slogin


ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, Nov. 11 — Gen. Pervez Musharraf, the Pakistani president, appeared to yield to intense American pressure on Sunday by restoring parliamentary elections in early January, but he said his emergency decree would last at least through then, immediately raising new questions about the vote’s legitimacy.

American officials and General Musharraf’s most important political rival, the opposition leader Benazir Bhutto, endorsed his announcement as a small step. Still, any election held when basic civil liberties have been scrapped could create new credibility problems for General Musharraf, who has become increasingly isolated politically, and for Ms. Bhutto, who returned to Pakistan from a life in exile to participate in the electoral process.

At a combative news conference where General Musharraf sweated visibly, he defended his Nov. 3 emergency decree as the tough decision-making of a selfless leader intent on saving his country from anarchy.

“I found myself between a rock and a hard surface,” said General Musharraf, who mostly spoke in English. “I have no egos, personal egos and no personal ambitions to guard.”

He also said he was committed to holding elections by Jan. 9.

But many opposition politicians and Western diplomats called the election date a ruse to ease the outcry against General Musharraf’s seizure of additional power. They questioned how Pakistan could have fair elections when his security forces have arrested 2,500 civilians, suspended the Constitution, blocked independent news channels and banned public gatherings.

“It’s an attempt at a sop,” said one Western diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity in keeping with diplomatic protocol. “He’s looking to see whether simply announcing an election date will placate people.”

In another expansion of power, the government announced Saturday that it had amended an army law so that civilians could be prosecuted by military courts. The last time Pakistani civilians faced courts-martial was during the 11-year military dictatorship of Muhammad Zia ul-Haq, which ended in 1988.

In Baluchistan, the government said two politicians from the province, Mir Hasil Bizenjo and Yusuf Mastikhan, would be charged with treason for protesting emergency rule. Muhammad Ali Saif, a government legal adviser, said the burning of army uniforms by protesters would be prosecuted in military courts.

General Musharraf’s news conference was his first since proclaiming emergency powers, a move that has created global alarm about the political stability of Pakistan, a nuclear-armed country where Islamic militants have been expanding their reach. But General Musharaff rejected demands at home and abroad to set a date for ending the emergency decree, which has effectively placed Pakistan under martial law.

Defiant and increasingly authoritarian, General Musharraf said the decree was precisely what was needed to fight the growing Islamic terrorism threat and “ensure absolutely fair and transparent elections.”

Raising his voice at times and showing flashes of anger, the normally poised general, who seized power from the last democratically elected government in a military coup eight years ago, spoke a day after President Bush described him as an ally America needed in the fight against Al Qaeda. Some Pakistanis felt General Musharraf was emboldened by President Bush’s embrace.

The general insisted that he remained popular in Pakistan. But he refused to specify a time when he would end the state of emergency, a step that American officials, including Mr. Bush, have repeatedly asked General Musharraf to take.

“I cannot give a date,” General Musharraf said. “We are in a difficult situation, therefore I cannot give a date.”

He also declined to give a date for stepping down as chief of the military, a move that the United States and other Western countries have requested as a sign of his seriousness about a transition back to democracy.

In Washington, American officials said that General Musharraf should be given more time. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice praised the announcement of an election date but called for an end to the state of emergency.

“The key is to take this in steps,” she said on the ABC News program “This Week.” “And the first step is to make certain that the state of emergency ends, to make sure that people can compete for free and fair elections for the Parliament.”

Ms. Bhutto, who is supported by Washington in her return to politics here, echoed Ms. Rice’s tone. She called General Musharraf’s announcement a “first, positive step” at a news conference in Lahore, the eastern city where she has threatened to lead a protest march on Tuesday.

Ms. Bhutto also said that holding fair elections under the state of emergency “seems to be difficult.” But she said she had “not shut the door” to talks with the Pakistani leader, perpetuating speculation that she and General Musharraf may be privately negotiating a power-sharing agreement.

The events on Sunday appeared to again place in jeopardy a troubled effort by American officials to unite General Musharraf and Ms. Bhutto in an alliance to combat members of Al Qaeda and the Taliban who operate out of the country’s rugged northwest area adjoining Afghanistan.

Pakistani analysts say that General Musharraf’s popularity is plummeting and that a review of that idea is urgently needed.

“The U.S. administration is not willing to accept that Musharraf has messed up,” said Hasan-Askari Rizvi, a leading political and defense analyst based in Lahore. “They don’t want to do any new thinking on Pakistan. At the highest level, they stick to their own framework.”

The analysts also warned that Ms. Bhutto, who has been advised by American officials not to rule out an agreement with General Musharraf, might taint herself by associating too closely with him. If she were elected under emergency rule, they said, she too would likely lose popular support.

“Over time, this simmering resentment and cynicism about her and her deal will undermine whatever elections results there are,” said Rasul Bakhsh Rais, a political scientist at the Lahore University of Management Studies. “The new generations want some respect for the country, a Pakistan that is in the mainstream of modern civilization.”

Western diplomats and Pakistani analysts questioned several aspects of General Musharraf’s performance at the news conference. Many of his statements, they said, were inaccurate or contradictory, and his demeanor was unusually tense.

“It was a pure defense of all his actions,” said Ikram Sehgal, a retired military officer and friend of General Musharraf’s who flew the helicopter used by the general’s commando unit. “He was not the same confident general I used to know.”

Dressed in a blue blazer and gray slacks instead of his customary military uniform, General Musharraf insisted throughout the news conference that he had not violated the Constitution. Instead, his declaration of emergency and suspension of the Constitution put the “derailed part of democracy back on the rail.”

He called the emergency decree “a bitter pill to swallow” and “no doubt that this was the most difficult decision I have ever taken in my life.” But his sole motivation, he said, was to save Pakistan from continued “turmoil and shock and confusion.”

The Pakistani leader spent 10 minutes giving a detailed accounting of corruption and abuse of power allegations against the chief justice of the country’s Supreme Court, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, who became highly popular in recent months for challenging General Musharraf’s authority. “Nobody is above the law, ladies and gentlemen,” General Musharraf said.

He said he had replaced Mr. Chaudhry after the emergency declaration to regain control of a court whose decisions left the country’s police forces “totally demoralized and shattered” and terrorists “encouraged.” Knowing that the move would lead to international condemnation, he said he went ahead with it anyway.

“I needed to take a decision in the interest of this nation, to preserve this nation, to safeguard it,” he said. “And risk myself.”

Opposition politicians have said the president acted because the Supreme Court was days away from ruling on the legality of his re-election last month. The verdict had been widely expected to declare General Musharraf ineligible to serve another term.

The country’s election commission, whose chairman General Musharraf appointed, will provide “absolutely aboveboard” election rules, he said, and opposition figures detained over the last week would be released and allowed to run in elections. But no one would be allowed to “disturb law and order,” he said, or “create anarchy in Pakistan in the name of election, in the name of democracy.”

Resigning his military post would sharply reduce General Musharraf’s power, according to Pakistani analysts. And many believe he will delay giving up the post as long as possible.

Defending the closing of independent television news stations, General Musharraf said he favored an independent press, but wanted safeguards on “defamation by design, distortion of facts, projecting nontruths, humiliation.”


“If the media is going to make heroes of terrorists,” he said at one point, “God save our battle against terrorism.”

Raising his voice, General Musharraf lectured journalists seated in the presidential building, complaining that the West did not understand Pakistan. He said foreign journalists overestimated Ms. Bhutto’s political support in Pakistan and that you “cannot impose sudden change.”





Great ...just great .. his utterings keep Bushisms to shame .

Originally posted by druidravi
Musharraf Sets No Date to End Emergency Rule
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/12/world/asia/12pakistan.html?_r=1&pagewanted=2&ref=asia&oref=slogin


ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, Nov. 11 — Gen. Pervez Musharraf, the Pakistani president, appeared to yield to intense American pressure on Sunday by restoring parliamentary elections in early January, but he said h ...[text shortened]... se sudden change.”





Great ...just great .. his utterings keep Bushisms to shame .

Simply pointing out his list of hypocricitical statements.

He says by imposing emergency and suspending constitution and aresting all opposition he has put democracy back on track .



He suspends chief justice of the supreme court saying no one is above law. But doesn't the law apply to him as well 🙄 .

He says no one would be allowed to create anarchy and allowed to disturb "law and order" . When he is the person doing it the most .

Originally posted by druidravi
Simply pointing out his list of hypocricitical statements.

He says by imposing emergency and suspending constitution and aresting all opposition he has put democracy back on track .



He suspends chief justice of the supreme court saying no one is above law. But doesn't the law apply to him as well 🙄 .

He says no one would be allowed to create anarchy and allowed to disturb "law and order" . When he is the person doing it the most .

I think we have to agree to disagree here. He has not kept his promises over a long period of time . The amount of times he said he will shed uniform or hold elections and doesn't do when the media focus shifts away from him have made me weary . I will take back my statements if he does hold elections in January and lifts emergency in 1 month.

With no offence to you I think you are defending him too much . Remember Musharaff =! Pakistan . You can support your country but not support its leader . Example Blair and UK people on the issue of Iraq .

Musharaff is bad for Pakistan as he's is weakening the democractic institutions by suspending constitution , suspending chief justice of supreme court and being a dictator . If Musharaff was just a prime minister of Pakistan there would be no problem, he does listen to sense once a while and is a realist .

Main point is what after Musharaff?? . What if he gets assassinated . There are already many attempts on his life. If he gets assassinated the country will descend into chaos and anarchy as there is no replacement for him . Compare this with a democracy where a leader can be replaced easily .

Democracy is self-sustaining dictatorship is not .

Originally posted by druidravi
I think we have to agree to disagree here. He has not kept his promises over a long period of time . The amount of times he said he will shed uniform or hold elections and doesn't do when the media focus shifts away from him have made me weary . I will take back my statements if he does hold elections in January and lifts emergency in 1 month.

Wit ...[text shortened]... where a leader can be replaced easily .

Democracy is self-sustaining dictatorship is not .

Originally posted by druidravi
I think we have to agree to disagree here. He has not kept his promises over a long period of time . The amount of times he said he will shed uniform or hold elections and doesn't do when the media focus shifts away from him have made me weary . I will take back my statements if he does hold elections in January and lifts emergency in 1 month.

Wit ...[text shortened]... where a leader can be replaced easily .

Democracy is self-sustaining dictatorship is not .

Originally posted by RSMA1234
I think you has mis-read some off my postings.

I have not said what he did is correct or right, I have mearly pointed out to you why it has happened.

I appreciate that you can support a country and nots its leader, I was just explaining that some off your postings where not looking at the whole situation and that a lot where theory based ideas.

The ...[text shortened]... her way I honestly donlt beileve democracy exists anywhere in the world in the way you descriibe

Originally posted by SMSBear716
I don't think druidravi actually cares about Pakistan or her people that much ... he is more concerned that Pakistan will be taken over by radical Islamic extremists who would then have access to Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. And who is right next door? India.

But even if the current government fell to such elements, I would say that I'm fairly certain ...[text shortened]... let Islamic radicals in Pakistan get their hands on them. Even Indian forces might assist.