No one can stop Nawaz’s return, revival of democracy - Page 6

Ray · 04-25-2006, 12:25 PM

Quote:

SECOND EDITORIAL: Qazi’s march on Islamabad

The Jamaat-e-Islami chief, Qazi Hussain Ahmad, in his address to his party’s convention on Sunday announced “a protest march in Islamabad against the government”. He didn’t name a date but said that “once we are there we will not go away”. The protest will last till the moment of President Pervez Musharraf’s abdication from office, he threatened. Significantly, he accused President Musharraf of following policies in the Tribal Areas and Balochistan that made the armed forces feel “insecure”. His argument was that unless someone forced him out of office, President Musharraf would not leave even after the 2007 elections. He said the date for the march would be announced after consultation within the MMA.

Qazi Hussain Ahmad should be careful with his threats. His “million man marches” have not ousted President Musharraf. His calls to “mammoth” rallies that would topple the Musharraf regime have not been heeded by Pakistanis. Indeed, if he should persist in his threats, he might get what Maulana Akram Awan of Chakwal got after announcing in 2001 that he would besiege Islamabad with his 20,000 “mystical” warriors and not go until General Musharraf had been ousted. He never got out of Chakwal on the appointed day! Also, before announcing the protest march, Mr Ahmed should have consulted the MMA and, within that, the JUI without whose support the likes of Ahle Hadith and JUP can hardly ensure the success of such a venture. In fact, without complete clerical support, the Jamaat could end up causing an ugly “priestly” rift that has been in the making for some time. *
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default...5-4-2006_pg3_1

Everyone seems to be against Musharraf, but Musharraf remains like the Rock of Gibraltar!

No one will be able to oust Musharraf from his sham democracy, because if there is even a whiff of his losing, he will do a repeat of the LBA elections.

Musharraf knows his value and he knows no one can touch him so long as Pakistan is in internal turmoil and so long as the AQ threat is alive!

Those who underestimates the political survivability ploys of Musharraf have a second guess coming!

Ray · 04-26-2006, 13:54 PM

Quote:

A caretaker set-up

AN acting government to oversee the general election due next year is good news in a country where the sanctity of the ballot paper is no part of the political culture. The 1970 general election was truly fair, and the one in 1988, even though manipulated by the post-Zia set-up to pre-empt a PPP victory, did enable the party to achieve a plurality. Barring these two examples, all elections have been rigged by the party in power or the military. The election in 2002 was manipulated from the word go. A law forbade a person from becoming prime minister a third time, and the government used all its administrative machinery to ensure the Muslim League’s victory. Against this background, Chief Election Commissioner Qazi Mohammad Farooq’s disclosure about an acting set-up for the next general election deserves to be welcomed, though certain questions remain unanswered.

In Bangladesh, where the president is the titular head of the republic, the Supreme Court chief justice heads the caretaker government for organising national elections. After the process ends, the elected government takes over. The result is that a country like Bangladesh, which otherwise has its quota of strikes, violence and political turmoil, has had fair elections. In Pakistan, the problem of a caretaker government is compounded by the kind of civilian-military mix we have. The question is who will head the caretaker government? In all fairness it should be the Supreme Court chief justice. But President Musharraf will still be there with all the administrative powers at his command, and that is hardly likely to make the caretaker prime minister’s or the CEC’s tasks easy. The constitution (Article 224) does provide for a caretaker government, but caretakers in the past have often given a poor account of themselves by straying into other fields such as accountability of politicians on grounds of corruption rather than concentrating on making the electoral process fair and impartial. Indeed, the accountability bogey has often been misused for persecuting political opponents and postponing elections. Ziaul Haq called off the on-going election campaign in 1977 and postponed the polls on the pretext of conducting the accountability of corrupt politicians and used this to perpetuate his tyranny for 11 years as president and army chief.

Let us hope that the acting prime minister and the CEC will go about their job differently. Under Article 220 of the Constitution, it is the duty of all executive authorities in the federal and provincial governments to assist the CEC and EC officials in the discharge of their duties. The caretaker government must ensure that the bureaucracy strictly follows the relevant rules and principles, and any official found to be deviating from these is taken to task. Fears also exist in certain quarters about the role of the local bodies. The majority of nazims and their deputies belong to the Muslim League, and they may be tempted or forced to help PML candidates by intimidating and obstructing rival candidates and stuffing the boxes with fake ballot papers. They can be checked only by the law enforcement machinery provided it stays neutral and helps the EC carry out its crucial task. However, elections will never be considered truly fair if Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif are not allowed to return home and take part in the process. Between them they represent sizable sections of voters, and denying them their right to elect and seek election would amount to scuttling the very concept of a fair electoral exercise. A broad consensus between the political parties and the government on how the caretaker set should function will obviously help.
http://www.dawn.com/2006/04/26/ed.htm

An interesting point raised!

I am sure if Bangladesh can do it, why should Pakistan not be capable of it?

Ray · 04-28-2006, 14:14 PM

Quote:

Friday, April 28, 2006 E-Mail this article to a friend Printer Friendly Version

PML split over support to uniform: party leaders

By Shahzad Raza

ISLAMABAD: Senior leaders of the Pakistan Muslim League (PML) on Thursday criticised their central and Punjab presidents for supporting Gen Pervez Musharraf’s position as both army chief and president, party sources told Daily Times.

PML leaders at an informal meeting lashed out at Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, the PML president, and Chaudhry Pervez Elahi, the Punjab chief minister and PML Punjab president, for making public statements in support of the uniform. Shujaat attended the meeting at the house of the party’s former vice president Majeed Malik, but did not say much or even try to explain his position on the uniform issue, said sources privy to the meeting.

They said that Malik, who had developed differences with the Chaudhrys over the election of Chakwal district nazim, said Elahi should not have publicly announced that Musharraf should stay in uniform. He said Elahi’s statement was not supported by the whole party and a formal position on the issue should have been decided at the party platform.

PML Vice President Hamid Nasir Chattha also said the chief minister should not have made the statement. PML Vice President Kabir Ali Wasti said the Chaudhrys’ policies had alienated several senior party leaders and they could quit the party.

PML Additional Secretary General Iqbal Dar said the party was being mocked for its position on the uniform issue.

PML vice presidents Manzoor Wattoo and Ijazul Haq criticised the incomplete organisation of the party.

Salim Saifullah and Gohar Ayub complained that the Chaudhrys were making party policies unilaterally.
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default...8-4-2006_pg1_9

The election scene gets murkier!

Lahori paa jee · 04-28-2006, 16:34 PM

Ahhh General Majeed again. Perhaps i will be able to tell you more about this meeting in a few days

Ray · 04-30-2006, 06:30 AM

Lahori,

Many days have passed.

Anything to share?

Maximus · 05-02-2006, 17:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ray

Lahori,

Many days have passed.

Anything to share?

Yeah!

Of all, he should know!

Ray · 05-02-2006, 17:29 PM

Quote:

A way out of the logjam

By Murtaza Razvi

RELIGION, the ideologues’ panacea against disharmony, has failed to unite this 60-year-old nation; self-serving politicians have only worked to perpetuate the hold of a feudal mindset that insists on exercising a complete control over people’s minds; an army of serving and retired generals rolling in money has done more for itself than for the country.

Last but not the least, the bureaucracy has worked untiringly to maintain the status quo, with ad-hocism as the driving force of a polity in disarray. This is Pakistan in 2006, gearing up for a general election due next year that marks the country’s 60th year of independence.

For all practical purposes, we have time and again asserted our independence vis-a-vis establishing the rule of law. Constitutions were framed to be violated and changed beyond their original character; rulers, military and civilian, came and went, leaving the polity poorer, the people virtually more disenfranchised. The state of democracy in 2006 is no better than it was under Ayub Khan or Ziaul Haq, who, like Gen Musharraf, had reinvented the political wheel but could not steer the nation in a manner that would bring stability to the political system. The experiments crumbled after the autocrats were out of power.

Gen Yahya Khan, by comparison, was a different breed altogether. Efforts have been made recently to humanise him, posthumously, as having been a man with a heart and a mind, but it is all irrelevant. Some skeletons of the past are better kept locked away in the cupboards of time. The number of people who blame Yahya Khan or Z. A. Bhutto, depending on which side of the political fence one stands, for the breaking away of East Pakistan is nearly equal. Mr Bhutto’s legendary charisma, too, is a thing of the past, thanks largely to his heir Ms Benazir Bhutto’s two stints in power.

The politically nouveau riche coterie raised and matured by Gen Zia in the form of the Nawaz League, too, is quite a spent force, with the Chaudhries taking over the charge of the PML under military tutelage. The latter’s control over politics in Punjab is near total, with their satellites and allies being able to contain the religious right in the Frontier and Balochistan and managing the affairs in Sindh. What happens next hinges largely on how long President Musharraf remains in power, and you don’t need the White House or the CIA to tell you that. For now, the support for Gen Musharraf is stronger outside than inside Pakistan. But that’s one man who cannot be ousted from office by a popular vote. He is above all accountability, above all political haranguing, just as the general wished it to be. It is he who single-handedly and single-mindedly decides what dams need to be built, what public-sector enterprises are to be privatised; an India-Pakistan cricket match is to be telecast or not.

Holed up in his besieged palace in Kathmandu, King Gyanendra must envy the man in khakis next door. The trick is that Gen Musharraf has had a parliament in place for the last four years, which is keen on pleasing him and him alone, as long as the ruling party MPs keep getting their share of the power pie.

Where do we go from here? There has got to be some hope for the teeming millions out there, one day, of establishing the rule of law. That hope, unfortunately, cannot come from Benazir Bhutto and Mian Nawaz Sharif cozying up to each other in London as long as their respective parties remain in disarray, which suits their whimsical styles of leadership. What is needed is a reorganisation along democratic lines of the two mainstream political parties that lay a claim to commanding a popular vote bank. It is because the two leaders, and not the parties, are made to be seen as deliverers, that a fatigue has set in among the general public. Both the leaders have been discredited, to an extent, twice, in the public eye.

The two parties, by acting merely as rubberstamps of the not-so-immensely popular leaders, have alienated the people. In the aftermath of the 1999 coup, the PPP and the PML-N have had all the time they needed to reorganise themselves. But they have failed to respond to public aspirations and raise their voices over issues that confront the people who feel disenfranchised and thus irrelevant to a system in whose formation and working they have had little say. It may work personally for Benazir Bhutto or Mian Nawaz Sharif to come back in power; the people have little reason to wish them back in power, as matters stand today.

What’s in a name, one may ask, whether it is Gen Musharraf, Shaukat Aziz or the Chaudhris, the religious right and the MQM, or the PPP and the PML-N in power when none promises a break from a turbulent past.

Democracy cannot take root in a society that has all the trappings of a feudal stranglehold over its system. The revolting sardars of Balochistan must be biting their nails in desperation for falling out of favour with the civil-military establishment. Their more cunning, or politically savvy, cousins — the village chaudhris, the makhdooms and the waderas in Punjab and Sindh — are firmly in the saddle. The maliks in the tribal belt too have their power and influence.

Besides, the establishment has shown a remarkable ability to create neo-feudal groupings to support and further its own political agenda. One calls them neo-feudals because their leaders behave in a manner that matches the tactics of their traditional feudal counterparts. The aim to control the people’s minds is the mainstay of their politics. The continued popularity of ethnocentric, sectarian and religious parties in pockets around the country where feudalism may be in decline falls in that category.

In the 2007 general election nearly 100 million Pakistanis over the age of 18 will be eligible to vote. Even if increased urbanisation in recent years — now estimated at 35 per cent of the total population — is taken into account as representing a proactive, better educated and thus relatively better aware group of participants in the political process, it is the bulk of the 65 per cent of the remaining less privileged majority that needs to become involved for any meaningful change to take place. What we are seeing instead is a widening economic gap between the haves and have-nots, in both urban and rural areas, sustaining a myriad of political and pressure groups that will continue to exist on the periphery of mainstream politics.

If the trend continues, and there is no reason to suggest otherwise, the end result will be a further fragmentation of society along socio-economic, ethnic, religious and other divisive lines. The promise of holding free, fair and transparent elections alone will not arrest the decline seen in a political culture based on public accountability of leaders and political parties. There are structural changes that need to be made to narrow the gap between those ruling the roost now and those aspiring to come to power as genuine representatives of the people.

The process of transformation must be begun by the ruling party and its backers in the establishment if they mean well by the country. It is these political players who are best equipped with the tools to bring about a change in the political culture under the existing circumstances. If the ruling party can reorganise itself on a genuine democratic footing other mainstream parties will have no choice but to follow suit. Democratic process has to start from within a political party and then play itself out in the larger inter-party political arena.

More important, the ruling party is in a position to allow the return of Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif from their exile abroad and even of the key ruling-coalition partner Altaf Hussain. The inclusiveness of the process will help lend credibility to the coming general election and sustain a political system based on democratic plurality rather than on the exclusion of principal political players opposed to the present civil-military ruling system.

Let everyone contest the polls without hindrance, to be held under a caretaker administration based on a broader political consensus among key parties. If we can implement this in the 60th year of our nationhood, the journey ahead may not be as turbulent as in the past.
http://www.dawn.com/2006/05/02/op.htm

Musharraf will still be there!

Ray · 05-02-2006, 17:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maximus

Yeah!

Of all, he should know!

He has been gagged by Musharraf's SS Waffen on WAB.

Ray · 05-03-2006, 13:59 PM

Quote:

Wednesday, May 03, 2006 E-Mail this article to a friend Printer Friendly Version

I’m not running for PM: Elahi

Staff Report

LAHORE: Punjab Chief Minister Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi has said there is no truth to reports he plans to run for prime minister after the next general elections.

“The country is making worthwhile progress in all walks of life under the leadership of Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz,” Elahi told reporters at Chief Minister’s House on Tuesday. The chief minister said he had excellent relations with the prime minister. Aziz had always given the Punjab government valuable advice on development matters, he added.
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default...3-5-2006_pg1_7

So at least one bloke has canned his ambition!

A good start!

Ray · 05-03-2006, 14:42 PM

Wednesday, May 03, 2006 E-Mail this article to a friend Printer Friendly Version

PPP says it will dominate the coming elections

PESHAWAR: Sikandar Hayat Sherpao, the NWFP general secretary of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) said on Tuesday that the PPP would take the maximum seats in the next general elections due to its good performance.

Sherpao said certain elements had misled the masses through empty slogans but the PPP under the leadership of Aftab Ahmed Sherpao had introduced a new concept of development-oriented politics to bring the man in the street to mainstream politics. Talking to party workers at the village Sherpao of district Charsadda, on the occasion of a party-membership drive, Sherpao said his party worked for the rights of the masses and never made false promises. staff repor
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default...-5-2006_pg7_15

Ray · 05-03-2006, 15:03 PM

Wednesday, May 03, 2006 E-Mail this article to a friend Printer Friendly Version

COMMENT: The uncertainty principle in Pakistani politics — William B Milam

In Pakistani politics these days, it seems impossible to determine the positions of political leaders at the same time as the direction they are heading. It is a stretch, I admit. But in most of my conversations, any one of a number of scenarios of the future seemed equally likely to my friends, and most appeared to lead back to where we started seven years ago

I have been absent from the pages of Daily Times for some months, but I have not been entirely absent from Pakistan — nor it from my thoughts. I recently spent some delightful and instructive days in Karachi, Lahore and Islamabad. I saw many dear friends and enjoyed many intellectually rich and stimulating conversations (and many equally rich meals). It was as if I had never left.

Politics dominated most of these discussions. But I found the tone and content of the discussions somewhat different than I remembered from the past. One word seemed to characterise the feelings of my interlocutors about Pakistani politics and their political future: “uncertain”. The election year of 2007 appears to have taken on a spectral image, a veritable “riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma”, as Churchill once said.

Questions abound, answers do not. Will President Pervez Musharraf dump his current political support, the PML, heretofore known as the PML-Q? Which parties would he choose to join with, and why? Which parties would choose to join with him and his military government? There were so many variables, and so many possible outcomes, that good friends who once would give authoritative answers at the drop of a naïve question now only list the many possible scenarios and shrug their shoulders to the inevitable query of which is best and/or more likely.

As this sunk in, I couldn’t help thinking of Werner Heisenberg’s “uncertainty principle”, particularly since I have been perusing a biography of this great German physicist. One conclusion, among many others, is that Pakistani politics may be almost as complex and arcane as quantum mechanics. They certainly seem that complicated to outsiders, and clearly these days, to some in the Pakistani political class.

I hope my physicist friends in Pakistan, as well as physicists everywhere, will forgive my mental flight of fancy that relates Heisenberg’s celebrated principle to anything as unscientific as politics — especially Pakistani politics. What Heisenberg proved was that it is impossible to determine the position of an atomic particle and its velocity at the same time. (The simple-minded definition is the best I can do.) In Pakistani politics these days, it seems impossible to determine the positions of political leaders at the same time as the direction they are heading.

It is a stretch, I admit. But in most of my conversations, any one of a number of scenarios of the future seemed equally likely to my friends, and most appeared to lead back to where we started seven years ago. Political leaders who now oppose Musharraf may be with him next year. Those who are now with him may be in opposition next year. When one has a fix on their positions, the direction and the velocity of their changing intentions cannot be determined. This, at least, was the impression I came away with.

There were rumours — wafting maybe on waves of hope — of attempts to link up of the so-called liberal political parties with President Musharraf and his military government in an alliance of the like-minded. By like-minded, I mean those political parties with an ideology (to the extent they have an ideology) consistent with “enlightened moderation”. This includes the PPP, ANP, a small faction of the PML-Q, and perhaps the MQM. This would actually be quite a departure from Pakistani political tradition, as it would be an alliance based on a shared ideology and would possibly lead to an election fought over issues. “Enlightened moderation” versus the alternative (call it what you want) might be the central issue of such an election.

Of all the elements missing in Pakistani politics and elections, issues are the most noticeable. Parties remain not only undemocratic but also oriented around patron-client relationships or identities (biradari, or regional, or ethnic, or linguistic, or religious, etc). Until political parties and elections are issue-based, Pakistan’s deep-seated, open questions of national identity, regional and ethnic tensions, and building representative government are not going to be resolved.

While many talk of this like-minded alliance, an un-likeminded, anti-Musharraf alliance seems to be the one coming together, according to many press reports. This would be quite different in most respects, and it would have a simple, one-point agenda: Musharraf and his government must go. Could this be the issue in an election overseen by a military government?

This un-likeminded alliance involves the “liberal” parties mentioned above, the PML-N, and Musharraf’s now deadly enemy, the MMA. Of course, as described in detail in the Daily Times editorial of April 18, the MMA will insist on a joint platform that basically rejects “enlightened moderation” and the connection with the US against terrorism. If the “liberal” parties agree to this, they will, again, be giving up their ideology for political expediency. Another Faustian Bargain in the making.

I wonder, however, whether any of the scenarios can promise effective and/or stable government? Any alliance that brings together the army and un-likeminded political allies in a marriage of convenience is, to my mind, inherently ineffective. Neither side trusts the other. Both are constantly watching their backs. There is no consensus on the issues and no way to get one. And what if the anti-Musharraf alliance were to win a free and fair election? Can such disparate partners actually work together, let alone set the country on a course of institutional improvement? How would the army react? And how much do you want to bet on a free and fair election in this scenario?

But it occurs to me that the first scenario, the liberal alliance with Musharraf, has at least the faint hope that ideologically like-minded allies have a better chance to work out a modus vivendi to tackle the immense social, political, and economic problems that Pakistan faces, as well as those questions of national identity and regional fissiparousness that plague the country.

It could be an issue-oriented government, setting targets on the basis of a consensus on the issues. That would be a startling breakthrough for Pakistan. Perhaps, over a few years, such an alliance would develop enough mutual trust that the traditional military dogma that civilians are not fit to run the country would finally dissipate. This may be a pipedream, but that is better than the nightmares other scenarios bring.

William Milam is a former US ambassador to Pakistan and Bangladesh. He is currently at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington DC

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default...3-5-2006_pg3_2

An intersting bit on Pak Political scene.

Daily Times is sure a leading newspaper since US Ambassadors too are regulars in this newspaper!

And interestingly Sparten in atongue in cheek way indicated otherwise!

Lahori paa jee · 05-04-2006, 14:31 PM

Major changes in Pakistani politics coming in a few days.

PML-Qurban League is cracking up by General Majeed led forward block.

Pir Pagara has already parted ways with Q-league.

Chaudhry's to be side lined

Shaukat Aziz to be PML-Q President soon........................Only time will tell

Neo · 05-04-2006, 14:34 PM

Few days Paa Jee??

Lahori paa jee · 05-04-2006, 14:37 PM

Its obvious that this party would self destruct. These were unnatural coalitions

Its quite possible that Mushy himself takes control of PML Q. Leave the presidency and contest in 2007 elections as a civilian

Neo · 05-04-2006, 14:38 PM

How powerful is the PML-Q actually?

05-04-2006, 14:34 PM	#88 (permalink)
Neo Silent lurker *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 04-06-05 Location: Amsterdam Posts: 7,920 Country:	Few days Paa Jee?? __________________ Administrator @ Defence.pk

05-04-2006, 14:37 PM	#89 (permalink)
Lahori paa jee *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 07-26-05 Location: Lahore, Pakistan Posts: 855	Its obvious that this party would self destruct. These were unnatural coalitions Its quite possible that Mushy himself takes control of PML Q. Leave the presidency and contest in 2007 elections as a civilian Last edited by Lahori paa jee : 05-04-2006 at 14:40 PM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
In China, Talk of Democracy Is Simply That	Ray	Current Affairs	1	04-22-2007 09:55 AM
Who is really afraid of democracy?	Ray	Current Affairs	3	05-14-2006 04:52 AM
Are Pakistanis fit for democracy?	Ray	Political Discussions	9	03-21-2006 21:00 PM
Return of military surveillance a threat to Indonesian democracy: analysts	troung	Current Affairs	0	10-28-2005 05:09 AM
Is Promoting Freedom and Democracy worth it?	Ray	Political Discussions	22	05-04-2005 21:55 PM

04-28-2006, 16:34 PM	#79 (permalink)
Lahori paa jee *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 07-26-05 Location: Lahore, Pakistan Posts: 855	Ahhh General Majeed again. Perhaps i will be able to tell you more about this meeting in a few days

04-30-2006, 06:30 AM	#80 (permalink)
Ray Postmaster General *Military Professional* Join Date: 08-20-03 Posts: 27,247 Country:	Lahori, Many days have passed. Anything to share?

05-03-2006, 14:42 PM	#85 (permalink)
Ray Postmaster General *Military Professional* Join Date: 08-20-03 Posts: 27,247 Country:	Wednesday, May 03, 2006 E-Mail this article to a friend Printer Friendly Version PPP says it will dominate the coming elections PESHAWAR: Sikandar Hayat Sherpao, the NWFP general secretary of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) said on Tuesday that the PPP would take the maximum seats in the next general elections due to its good performance. Sherpao said certain elements had misled the masses through empty slogans but the PPP under the leadership of Aftab Ahmed Sherpao had introduced a new concept of development-oriented politics to bring the man in the street to mainstream politics. Talking to party workers at the village Sherpao of district Charsadda, on the occasion of a party-membership drive, Sherpao said his party worked for the rights of the masses and never made false promises. staff repor http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default...-5-2006_pg7_15

05-03-2006, 15:03 PM	#86 (permalink)
Ray Postmaster General *Military Professional* Join Date: 08-20-03 Posts: 27,247 Country:	Wednesday, May 03, 2006 E-Mail this article to a friend Printer Friendly Version COMMENT: The uncertainty principle in Pakistani politics — William B Milam In Pakistani politics these days, it seems impossible to determine the positions of political leaders at the same time as the direction they are heading. It is a stretch, I admit. But in most of my conversations, any one of a number of scenarios of the future seemed equally likely to my friends, and most appeared to lead back to where we started seven years ago I have been absent from the pages of Daily Times for some months, but I have not been entirely absent from Pakistan — nor it from my thoughts. I recently spent some delightful and instructive days in Karachi, Lahore and Islamabad. I saw many dear friends and enjoyed many intellectually rich and stimulating conversations (and many equally rich meals). It was as if I had never left. Politics dominated most of these discussions. But I found the tone and content of the discussions somewhat different than I remembered from the past. One word seemed to characterise the feelings of my interlocutors about Pakistani politics and their political future: “uncertain”. The election year of 2007 appears to have taken on a spectral image, a veritable “riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma”, as Churchill once said. Questions abound, answers do not. Will President Pervez Musharraf dump his current political support, the PML, heretofore known as the PML-Q? Which parties would he choose to join with, and why? Which parties would choose to join with him and his military government? There were so many variables, and so many possible outcomes, that good friends who once would give authoritative answers at the drop of a naïve question now only list the many possible scenarios and shrug their shoulders to the inevitable query of which is best and/or more likely. As this sunk in, I couldn’t help thinking of Werner Heisenberg’s “uncertainty principle”, particularly since I have been perusing a biography of this great German physicist. One conclusion, among many others, is that Pakistani politics may be almost as complex and arcane as quantum mechanics. They certainly seem that complicated to outsiders, and clearly these days, to some in the Pakistani political class. I hope my physicist friends in Pakistan, as well as physicists everywhere, will forgive my mental flight of fancy that relates Heisenberg’s celebrated principle to anything as unscientific as politics — especially Pakistani politics. What Heisenberg proved was that it is impossible to determine the position of an atomic particle and its velocity at the same time. (The simple-minded definition is the best I can do.) In Pakistani politics these days, it seems impossible to determine the positions of political leaders at the same time as the direction they are heading. It is a stretch, I admit. But in most of my conversations, any one of a number of scenarios of the future seemed equally likely to my friends, and most appeared to lead back to where we started seven years ago. Political leaders who now oppose Musharraf may be with him next year. Those who are now with him may be in opposition next year. When one has a fix on their positions, the direction and the velocity of their changing intentions cannot be determined. This, at least, was the impression I came away with. There were rumours — wafting maybe on waves of hope — of attempts to link up of the so-called liberal political parties with President Musharraf and his military government in an alliance of the like-minded. By like-minded, I mean those political parties with an ideology (to the extent they have an ideology) consistent with “enlightened moderation”. This includes the PPP, ANP, a small faction of the PML-Q, and perhaps the MQM. This would actually be quite a departure from Pakistani political tradition, as it would be an alliance based on a shared ideology and would possibly lead to an election fought over issues. “Enlightened moderation” versus the alternative (call it what you want) might be the central issue of such an election. Of all the elements missing in Pakistani politics and elections, issues are the most noticeable. Parties remain not only undemocratic but also oriented around patron-client relationships or identities (biradari, or regional, or ethnic, or linguistic, or religious, etc). Until political parties and elections are issue-based, Pakistan’s deep-seated, open questions of national identity, regional and ethnic tensions, and building representative government are not going to be resolved. While many talk of this like-minded alliance, an un-likeminded, anti-Musharraf alliance seems to be the one coming together, according to many press reports. This would be quite different in most respects, and it would have a simple, one-point agenda: Musharraf and his government must go. Could this be the issue in an election overseen by a military government? This un-likeminded alliance involves the “liberal” parties mentioned above, the PML-N, and Musharraf’s now deadly enemy, the MMA. Of course, as described in detail in the Daily Times editorial of April 18, the MMA will insist on a joint platform that basically rejects “enlightened moderation” and the connection with the US against terrorism. If the “liberal” parties agree to this, they will, again, be giving up their ideology for political expediency. Another Faustian Bargain in the making. I wonder, however, whether any of the scenarios can promise effective and/or stable government? Any alliance that brings together the army and un-likeminded political allies in a marriage of convenience is, to my mind, inherently ineffective. Neither side trusts the other. Both are constantly watching their backs. There is no consensus on the issues and no way to get one. And what if the anti-Musharraf alliance were to win a free and fair election? Can such disparate partners actually work together, let alone set the country on a course of institutional improvement? How would the army react? And how much do you want to bet on a free and fair election in this scenario? But it occurs to me that the first scenario, the liberal alliance with Musharraf, has at least the faint hope that ideologically like-minded allies have a better chance to work out a modus vivendi to tackle the immense social, political, and economic problems that Pakistan faces, as well as those questions of national identity and regional fissiparousness that plague the country. It could be an issue-oriented government, setting targets on the basis of a consensus on the issues. That would be a startling breakthrough for Pakistan. Perhaps, over a few years, such an alliance would develop enough mutual trust that the traditional military dogma that civilians are not fit to run the country would finally dissipate. This may be a pipedream, but that is better than the nightmares other scenarios bring. William Milam is a former US ambassador to Pakistan and Bangladesh. He is currently at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington DC http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default...3-5-2006_pg3_2 An intersting bit on Pak Political scene. Daily Times is sure a leading newspaper since US Ambassadors too are regulars in this newspaper! And interestingly Sparten in atongue in cheek way indicated otherwise!

05-04-2006, 14:31 PM	#87 (permalink)
Lahori paa jee *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 07-26-05 Location: Lahore, Pakistan Posts: 855	Major changes in Pakistani politics coming in a few days. PML-Qurban League is cracking up by General Majeed led forward block. Pir Pagara has already parted ways with Q-league. Chaudhry's to be side lined Shaukat Aziz to be PML-Q President soon........................Only time will tell

05-04-2006, 14:38 PM	#90 (permalink)
Neo Silent lurker *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 04-06-05 Location: Amsterdam Posts: 7,920 Country:	How powerful is the PML-Q actually?

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)