[Reader-list] Fwd: PK - PakNationalists - The 'Wrong' March: Why Military Won't Intervene

[yasir ~يا سر]

kjghg


I am happy at how things are turning out. You know what i think of him (zaid
H).
whether its Gen Mush, AsifZ or NawazS on top, the lawyers movement will
still go ahead independently because


   - it is for extending the Rule of Law to all citizens of pakistan, weak
   and influential alike,
   - it is is for a judiciary which does not follow the Executive ie
   (President/COAS or PM), and
   - it is for extending the cover of protection given by the Constitution
   of Pakistan to all its citizens, and holding especially those in positions
   of power accountable to the public - so all it says is follow the
   Constitution.

no government can gain legitimacy without the lawyers' bodies, the experts
in law - even the biggest party PPP could not influence its own lawyers to
walk away from the judiciary issue in the Pakistan's Bar councils.

My humble suggestion is to stand up for the Rule of Law and
Constitutionality, no matter which politician is with you or against you.
Pakistan deserves this unfinished independence after 60 years - the
independence of its people.
best wishes :)
----------------------------------
>
>
>
> The ‘Wrong’ March: Why The Pakistani Military Won’t Intervene
>
>
>
> By AHMED QURAISHI
>
> Saturday, 14 March 2009.
>
> ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—The Pakistani military will not intervene to protect
President Asif Ali Zardari or his nemesis Nawaz Sharif. Although firmly
opposed to intervention as per the wishes of Army Chief Gen. Ashfaq Parvez
Kayani, the Pakistani military is nonetheless exploring all options to deal
with the looming specter of a total collapse of government leading to
anarchy across the country.
>
>
>
> There is a common feeling in military circles that Pakistan’s elite
political class should bear the responsibility for its decisions. The full
range of the public administration abilities of these politicians, many of
whom have been elected more than twice and thrice, are exposed as sharply
lacking. The political class consists of people who are recycled, tried,
tested and failed.
>
>
>
> But the ineptitude of Pakistani politicians has entered a dangerous phase
now. The new threat includes creating an ethnic confrontation between two
provinces, Sindh and Punjab, which could result from the aggressive drive by
Mr. Nawaz Sharif to dislodge the Zardari government.
>
>
>
> This time Pakistanis are seeing a breathtaking failure and irresponsible
behavior across the board.
>
>
>
> ZARDARI VS. SHARIF
>
>
>
> The incompetence of President Zardari is evident in the manner in which he
deliberately pushed all his political enemies to align themselves against
him simultaneously. The support for Mr. Zardari’s government from the United
States and the United Kingdom is a matter of deep concern for many
Pakistanis. These Pakistanis feel that Mr. Zardari’s government is a vehicle
for Washington and London to contain Pakistan’s military, intelligence
agencies and its nuclear and advanced missile programs. They cite the
examples of the behavior of this government in the aftermath of the Mumbai
attacks, the attempts to sideline and dismantle ISI, and the acceptance of
U.S. military’s aerial and ground border violations. In this sense, Mr.
Zardari has few friends within the Pakistani public opinion. His ouster is
the demand of most Pakistani nationalists.
>
>
>
> But Mr. Nawaz Sharif’s role is no less deceptive and destructive than that
of Mr. Zardari’s. The former premier, who is denouncing Mr. Zardari today,
played the most important role in helping Mr. Zardari become President.
Nawaz Sharif helped Zardari come to power. It is hypocritical for Mr. Sharif
now to condemn NRO (the law that Musharraf promulgated on Anglo-American
desire to facilitate the return of the Bhutto-Zardari combine back to power)
when his own political career is at stake. Nawaz Sharif’s recent outbursts
are not principled politics but revenge. The sorry part is that the lawyers
and the media have failed to put this opportunism by Mr. Sharif on the
spotlight.
>
>
>
> Mr. Sharif has also declared ‘rebellion’ against the State and has
encouraged policemen and government officials to declare mutiny. This is the
most dangerous aspect of this crisis. The fact that Pakistani television
commentators have almost ignored this dangerous call is surprising. For
those Pakistanis who had condemned, in 2005, the rebellion against the State
by politician-turned-terrorist Akbar Bugti, Mr. Sharif’s statements came as
a shock. It is possible that in the near future, Bugti-wannabes will quote
Sharif’s example to justify such rebellions. Their argument will be, ‘You
ignore the calls for rebellion from Punjab politicians but condemn those
from smaller provinces.’
>
>
>
> Another alarming development was how Mr. Sharif resorted to portray his
issues with Mr. Zardari as a battle between the entire Punjab province and a
President from Sindh.
>
>
>
> This use of the so-called ‘Punjab card’ by the Sharif brothers sets a
dangerous precedent. Pakistan’s security managers must stay alert to the
possibility of trouble in Sindh if the Zardari government falls. There are
indications that subversive elements will stoke trouble by suggesting that
Mr. Zardari’s government crumbled due to a mutiny led by Punjab.
>
>
>
> This is why it is important that Mr. Nawaz Sharif does not emerge from
this crisis with more political influence than what he had before the
crisis. Pakistanis are right in wanting Mr. Zardari and his team out, but
the Sharif brothers are not the right replacement. This is also why it is
important to heed the advice of Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain of the PML-Q.
Shujaat has proposed a three-party coalition government in Punjab, where Mr.
Sharif will have to share power with both PPPP and PML-Q.
>
>
>
> AMERICA & BRITIAN
>
>
>
> It was surprising to see some Pakistani commentators describe the panicked
American and British diplomatic moves to save the Zardari government as
‘good this time’ because, in the words of these commentators, the two
countries were trying to stabilize Pakistan and save democracy.
>
>
>
> The reality comes with a twist. Such naïveté on the part of some
Pakistanis is unfortunate and shows the extent to which Pakistan stands
confused and disturbed thanks to the constant barrage of Anglo-American
psychological operations, missile attacks, and covert insurgencies being
waged against this country by the powers that occupy Afghanistan.
>
>
>
> The fact is that Washington and London moved swiftly to save the Zardari
government regardless of whether they like Mr. Zardari or not. This is a
government in which Washington had made huge investment. It is part of a
‘deal’ linked to the Anglo-American interests in the region.
>
>
>
> It is incorrect that Washington ‘does not trust’ President Zardari, as
some Pakistani commentators have been saying recently. The Americans
accepted Benazir Bhutto after a long neglect when they felt they needed to
counterbalance the Pakistani military and Musharraf, whom America and
Britain did not trust.
>
>
>
> President Zardari is as acceptable to Washington and London as Benazir
Bhutto was when the ‘deal’ was brokered by the two capitals to force a
beleaguered Musharraf to share power with someone the Anglo-Americans could
trust.
>
>
>
> The real problem this time was that President Zardari made an unnecessary
move that threatened this government and made the military takeover look
good to many Pakistanis. The Americans need this democracy so that they can
use its players to counterbalance the Pakistani military in Afghanistan and
Kashmir. They know it is easy to meddle in Pakistan. They know that
Pakistani politicians are characterless, corrupt and easily buyable through
money and power. There are no political parties in Pakistan, only political
families with their own interests. It is easy for foreign powers to
manipulate these players for their interests.
>
>
>
> So U.S. and U.K. intervened to save ‘democracy’ and avert the scary
possibility of the Anglo-Americans having to deal with the Pakistani
military in the driving seat again.
>
>
>
> LAWYERS’ MOVEMENT
>
>
>
> Despite the good intentioned statements to the contrary, the lawyers’
movement has become thoroughly politicized by now. Pakistanis have noticed
how Mr. Nawaz Sharif, a political partisan with his own agenda, has become
the face of the movement and its official spokesperson.
>
>
>
> In 2007, wily politicians too scared to directly confront the military
government sheepishly hid behind the lawyers’ movement and used it to topple
the military government.
>
>
>
> In 2008, the politicians ditched the lawyers and refused to boycott
elections under a military ruler.
>
>
>
> In 2009, one politician, Nawaz Sharif, is using the lawyers to topple
another politician, Asif Zardari.
>
>
>
> Chaudhry Aitzaz Ahsan played a key role in turning the movement into a
tool for ambitious politicians. Chaudhry Iftikhar, the deposed chief
justice, would have done a great service by decisively shunning this overt
politicization. But even he, after being released from house arrest in March
2008, dashed straight to the residence of Asif Zardari, not a president then
but the leader of the party in government, to thank him for releasing him.
When Zardari shunned him, Iftikhar is now basking in the glory of Mr.
Sharif.
>
>
>
> Mr. Sharif is no innocent political player and the message of change that
the lawyers’ movement is promoting cannot happen with Mr. Sharif at the
helm.
>
>
>
> The question is: Have the two Chaudhrys - Iftikhar and Aitzaz –
irreparably politicized the noble cause of an independent judiciary? If he
is restored, will Chaudhry Iftikhar be in a position to fairly deal with Mr.
Sharif and the other political players in the country?
>
>
>
> Then there is also this: Pakistan does need an independent judiciary. But
this should come as part of wider changes in the entire political system
that is falling apart. Merely reinstating a few judges, who are also now
politicized, will never solve the problem for good.
>
>
>
> THE MEDIA
>
>
>
> The media in Pakistan has also gone berserk, becoming political partisan
under the pretext of siding with truth. First its hype helped these failed
politicians come to power. The media failed to help the Pakistani public
opinion ask questions about the past record of these politicians before
electing them. During the run-up to the 2008 elections, the media suppressed
any criticism of these politicians under the pretext of fighting
dictatorship. And today when these politicians have plunged the nation into
another unnecessary confrontation because of their lust for power, the media
has readily become a tool in this fight, siding with one party against
another. Until now, there is no regulation whatsoever of this important
medium of influence. Other countries have sophisticated media management
systems that wage diplomatic and military wars. In Pakistan, this important
pillar of national security is running amok.
>
>
>
> DEMOCRATIC HORROR
>
>
>
> If democracy could turn into horror, it just did in Pakistan. Politicians
and partisan activists posing as civil society have just turned Pakistan
into the butt of global jokes: a nation with vast economic, geographic,
cultural and military potential that is unable to produce a mature, educated
leadership.
>
>
>
> This internal chaos is excellent fodder for the propaganda that strong
lobbies in the United States have been engaging in against Pakistan over the
past two years, trying to convince the world that Pakistan is a dangerous
country that desperately needs U.S. military intervention and containment of
its nuclear and strategic programs.
>
>
>
> The worst part is that even if the judges are restored and Mr. Nawaz
Sharif’s government in Punjab is reinstated, this failed political system in
Pakistan will keep generating artificial tensions and crises linked to
dogfights among politicians over booty. Pakistan is ripe for a major
overhaul in its political structure and foreign policy. Sooner or later, the
ball will fall in the military’s court. When that happens, the military
better be ready with creative solutions because old-style coups won’t work
this time.
>
>