News Archives

Latest News

January 2008

December 2007

November 2007

October 2007

September 2007

August 2007

July 2007

June 2007

May 2007

April 2007

March 2007

January 2007

December 2006

November 2006

October 2006

September 2006

August 2006

July 2006

June 2006

May 2006

April 2006

March 2006

February 2006

January 2006

December 2005

November 2005

October 2005

September 2005

August 2005

July 2005

June 2005

May 2005

April 2005

March 2005

February 2005

January 2005

December 2004

The Rediff Interview/Benazir Bhutto
 

February  2007

HYDERABAD, February 17, 2007: President Sindh People’s Youth Aajiz Dhamra on Tuesday condemned the “political victimisation” of PPP leaders and announced a protest against Sindh Chief Minister’s remarks against PPP women leaders.

Addressing a news conference at the Hyderabad press club, he said the government has broken all records of “rigging” in the by-elections to NA-250 Karachi and PS-71 Kotri seats, where state machinery was “freely” used to suppress the opposition candidates and their voters.

He said the police played the role of silent spectators during an “armed attack” on PPP leaders Syed Qaim Ali Shah and others during the Jamshoro by-poll “on the instructions of the chief minister”.

He said provincial ministers and advisers remained busy in bogus voting and PPP voters and workers were “victimised” and “tortured”.

He condemned the remarks of chief minister against PPP leader Naheed Khan.

He also criticised the government for registering a “fake” case against the PS-71 candidate and announced protests all over the province against the government’s “victimisation campaign” against PPP leaders.

Our Thatta correspondent adds: Local leaders and workers of the Pakistan Peoples Party Parliamentarians (PPPP) staged a protest demonstration in front of the Thatta press club here on Tuesday.

Led by PPPP district office-bearers Pir Ghulam Rahmani, Dr Abdul Wahid Soomro and Baboo Ghulam Hussain Memon, the protesters chanted slogans against the Sindh chief minister for making what they called “indecent” remarks against their party chairperson Benazir Bhutto.

Islamabad February 15, 2007: A Pakistan Peoples Party spokesperson has condemned the abuse of power to infringe on the constitutional right of citizens to freely gather and peacefully protest policies that are detrimental to the welfare of the Nation.

In a statement today a spokesperson of the Party condemned the imposition of section 144, preventing more than five people gathering together by the Nazim of the Musharaf-Shaukat Aziz regime in Dadu district. He said that section 144 is imposed only in the face of violent and bloody protests and is not a tool against peaceful political protests in a peaceful environment.

Former Law Minister Pir Mazhar ul Haq was forcibly stopped from leading recently a protest march against the abusive language used by military puppet Chief Minister Sindh with the illegal imposition of Section 144. Dadu Nazim instituted a criminal case against him at the behest of chief minister forcing him, like so many other citizens at the receiving end of a brutal military regime, to seek bail from the court that was granted on Wednesday Feb 14.

The spokesman said that the Musharaf-Aziz duo of the military regime, through its henchmen in the Punjab and Sindh have repeatedly been resorting to section 144 for stopping political opposition instead for the maintenance of law and order. Most notoriously it was used to break up the welcome reception to Senator Asif Zardari upon his return to Lahore on April 16, 2005.

Giving a litany of the regime’s high handedness he said that on February 10 during by elections in Sindh a provincial minister Altaf Unar ordered his bodyguards to kill Parliamentarian Dr Azra Pecheho, the sister in law of former Prime Minister Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto, the former Chief Minister and member Sindh Assembly Syed Qaim Ali Shah and others travelling in a car. The members miraculously escaped as they were travelling in a bulletproof car. Both the back and front windshields of the car were shattered and a bullet lodged in the roof as volleys were fired from sub machine guns.

He said that the police refused to file a criminal complaint of attempted murder against the provincial minister. Subsequently on a reference to the court only a criminal complaint was filed on February 12.

He said that the Police officers who refused to file the criminal complaint have abused their positions and it was a fit case for concerned international bodies like UN Rapporteur on Judges and Judiciary and the International Parliamentary Union to take up.

The PPP condemned the attempt to turn Pakistan into Pinochet's Chile with disappearances, goon squads to intimidate opposition and murder attempts by members of the regime including Nazims and provincial ministers. The PPP called upon all citizens to save Pakistan from such thugs by supporting the PPP and its allied parties and rejecting the present tyranny.

On February 10 also as the PPP was winning the bye-election in Karachi, its candidate Nafees Siddiqui, his family members and other polling agents were beaten and intimidated by the MQM members of the ruling coalition. No action has been taken against those who used the goon squads to thrash male and female polling agents and also physically abused the PPP candidate.
On February 14 the PPP decided to protest the rigging and use of force in front of the Election Commission office in Karachi. The goon squads sent someone on top of the open vehicle in which the female Information Secretary of PPP, and a sitting Parliamentarians Ms Sherry Rahman was standing. With a blunt instrument they hit her on the neck. She had to be hospitalised with the MRI scan showing the injury.

He said that in all these cases, the Musharaf-Aziz military regime has colluded by giving political protection to the violators of law, he said. Had the ministers, mayors, thugs and police officers who refuse to do their duty arrested or proceeded against the perpetrators of these heinous and violent crimes against political opponents it would served as a deterrence. However, by giving political protection to the perpetuators of violent acts, the regime is colluding in the murder and mayhem.

The spokesperson recalled that the murderers of the three PPP workers in the Attock bye election of Shaukat Aziz two years ago are still free while the families of victims are grieving for justice. Six PPP workers were killed in Attock on February 9 in which the suspect is the district Nazim Attock who is related to the Chief Minister of Punjab.

The PPP condemns the attempt to turn Pakistan into Pinochet's Chile with disappearances, goon squads to intimidate opposition and murder attempts by members of the regime including Mayors and provincial ministers. The PPP called upon all citizens to save Pakistan from such thugs by supporting the PPP and its allied parties and rejecting the present tyranny.

The PPP spokesman said that those who violated the law could not hide forever as the wheel of history turned and as it turned with the triumph of democracy and the rule of law, the thugs would have to face the majesty of law just as they had to do the same in Pinochet's Chile

DADU, Feb 13: The People’s Party Parliamentarians President Makhdoom Amin Fahim demanded on Tuesday suspension of local bodies governments three months before general elections arguing that the local governments would affect the elections process.

Talking to journalists after offering condolences to the cousins of Pir Mazharul Haq Pir, Pir Najeeb, Pir Yousuf and Pir Kaleemullah on the death of their uncle Pir Abdul Hameed at Pir Jo Goth Mr Fahim said that the government machinery was openly used in the by-elections in Kotri and Karachi and PPP MNAs were attacked, which threw into doubt the election commission’s impartiality.

He demanded that an independent election commission should be constituted and a caretaker government should be put in place with national consensus to hold general elections in a transparent manner.

He denied the party had struck up a deal with the government and claimed that Ms Bhutto would return to the country to participate in the polls after the announcement of elections schedule.

He said that all the opposition parties would have to sit together and decide whether they should participate in elections or not. People should play their role against rigging in general elections otherwise they would have to regret, he said.

Mr Fahim who is also chairman of the Alliance for the Restoration of Democracy said that the Indian government was not following the water accord on Baglihar Dam and slammed the government for not bringing the dams’ issue in the parliament. The issue should be discussed in the parliament, he said.

He regretted that the government was terminating the jobs of people who were recruited during PPP governments and assured that the party would reinstate all the fired employees once it came to power and would also create more job opportunities.

The old Sindhi villages were being destroyed under a planed conspiracy, he said and expressed fear that the Sindhis’ homes in interior Sindh might also be demolished. The one man show had led to worsening law and order situation in the country where women were not safe even within the walls of their homes, he said.

poet passes away: A local poet and writer Allah Nawaz Rukanai died here late on Monday night due to cardiac arrest. He was aged 77 years.

Late Rukanai has left behind two sons, three draughters and a wife to mourn his death.

He was buried at Shakir Pir graveyard near Dadu on Tuesday evening in the presence of hundreds of people including poets and writers from across the province.

Islamabad, Feb 12: Former Pakistan Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto has blamed the government for an "assassination bid" on her sister-in-law, a PPP parliamentarian, during Saturday's by-election polling in Sindh.

Alleging that the regime had been "gripped by fear and panic and was resorting to violence" as the general election was coming close, Bhutto demanded action against a provincial minister, Altaf Unar, for the attack on Azra Fazal Pacheho, sister of Asif Ali Zardari.

The Pakistan People's Party (PPP) chief alleged that the minister accompanied by his armed body guards fired and shattered the windscreens of the jeep Pacheho was travelling in, the Dawn said today.

"The attack on a woman leader is not only a shameful act but also a worst manifestation of cowardice and is condemned in the strongest terms," Bhutto said in a statement.

Bhutto said that such "assassination bids" would not deter the party from pursuing its "democratic agenda" aimed at restoring democracy in the country.

The PPP has filed a criminal complaint with the area magistrate naming provincial ministers, including Altaf Unar, and their bodyguards for the attack on the PPP leader.

Six PPP activists were gunned down in Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz's constituency in Attock two days earlier.

THATTA, Feb 14: Activists of People’s Party Parliamentarians (PPP) and its sister organisations staged rallies, demonstrations and token hunger strikes across the province on Wednesday against alleged rigging in the by-elections in Karachi and Dadu and attacks on party leaders on the polls day.

Party activists staged a peace march in Gharo town. The marchers gathered on the National Highway where they staged a sit-in in protest against chief minister’s use of derogatory and abusive language against PPP leaders Naheed Khan, Sassui Palijo and Makhdoom Amin Fahim and fictitious cases against Ghulam Qadir Palijo, said Luqman Malkani, local party leader.

Gharo Police later booked MPA Sassui Palijo, Abdul Sattar Lohar and 268 other party activists on charges of blocking the highway, creating public nuisance, obstructing police in performing duties and creating law and order situation.

Gharo TPO Gul Abbas said that party activists staged a procession in the town and gathered on the highway where they staged a sit-in and used libellous language against the chief minister. The blockade resulted in suspension of traffic for over three hours and caused great inconvenience to commuters, he added.

A party activist Mumtaz Jokhio told journalists on phone that 20 leaders and activists including Sassui Palijo, her father Ghulam Qadir Palijo, Syed Iqbal Shah, Abdul Sattar Lohar, an Awam Dost councillor Ms Shahnaz Jokhio and 20 other party men and women were on the FIR besides 250 other activists included as unidentified.

TANDO MOHAMMAD KHAN: Activists staged a demonstration and a sit-in on the Phulelli Road and vowed that they would continue their protest against the chief minister.

PPP city president Mashooq Ali Bhatti, general secretary Ali Nawaz Bhutto, SPSF leader Allah Bux Bhatti and Sindh People’s Youth (SPY) leader Gulzar Bhatti said that the chief minister’s use of inappropriate language against the chairperson and other women leaders was a bid to please Gen Musharraf.

KHAIRPUR: A large number of lawyers of Peoples Lawyers Forum (PLF) staged a procession and a demonstration on the Court Road.

PLF President Liaquat Ali Shar, Sajjad Kolachi and Bachal Shah slammed attack on Qaim Ali Shah and Dr Azra Pechuho on the by-elections day. The use of insulting language against women ran counter to the culture and traditions of Sindh, they said.

DADU: Activists of SPY staged demonstrations and observed token hunger strikes in Khairpur Nathan Shah and Dadu and made an appeal to the chief election commissioner to take notice of rigging and attacks on MNAs, MPAs and party workers.

NAWABSHAH: Activist of SPY staged a demonstration on the Sakrand Road against attack on party leaders and workers and warned the chief minister against using abusive language against the women party leaders

SPY leaders Saalim Zardari, Kashif Ali Noorani, Sarwar Khaskheli and Mouladad Gaho charged that state machinery was used in by-elections in Karachi and Kotri.

MIRPURKHAS: Activists of SPY observed a token hunger strike at the Post Office Chowk bringing traffic to a halt for a few hours. SPY leaders Tharo Khan Panhwar, Hanif Memon, Abdul Razzaq Khaskheli, Abdul Razzaq Sonara and others participated in the token hunger strike.

JACOBABAD: Activists of SPY staged a rally which marched on different roads of the city before staging a sit-in at the DCO Chowk.

Similar protests were held in Larkana and other cities and towns of Sindh.

 
Islamabad, Feb 11: The pro-Musharraf ruling Muthahida Quami Movement and Pakistan Muslim League have won the two key by-elections to the National Assembly from Sindh defeating the nominees of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto- led Pakistan Peoples Party.

Seen as a dry run for the general elections due later this year, MQM and PML-Q, which are part of the coalition in the federal and provincial Sindh governments, won the seats with comfortable majorities in the polls held yesterday.

The by-polls in one of the seats in Karachi and Jamshoro evinced interest at the national level as PPP contested the two seats in its stronghold Sindh.

Musharraf, who is planning to get elected for yet another five-year term by the existing assemblies before their term ends in November wants the PPP to join his pro-military coalition to reinforce his rule for the next five years.

Bhutto, who is confined to her self exile for over eight years, has apparently linked any deal with Musharraf to her return to take part in the polls.

The by-polls were seen as a test case for PPP to battle against the two ruling coalition partners who had full support of the state machinery.

PPP has alleged rigging and violence and accused the Election Commission and the security forces of inaction.

The party said a number of its activists have been injured in the clashes in some of the polling booths in which it accused the rival candidates of using guns.

Meanwhile, Bhutto is expected to attend an all party opposition meeting called by deposed premier Nawaz Sharif in London next month.

Bhutto's publicly acknowledged talks with Musharraf created misgivings in the opposition ranks specially the validity of charter of democracy, she signed with Sharif last year to oppose Army rule in future.

LAHORE: The Pakistan People’s Party (PPP)’s new ‘think tank’, in its first meeting, has decided to revive the slogan of ‘Roti, kapra aur makkan’ (Food, clothing and housing) first made popular by the party’s founder Zulfikar Ali Bhutto.

The think tank also recommended that the PPP would contest the next general elections despite pre-poll rigging, and that the find fresh blood to make future politicians who would ensure a prosperous and democratic Pakistan.

The PPP leaders on the think tank said that ZA Bhutto was unable to fulfil his promise of providing food clothing and shelter to every Pakistani because he was only allowed five years in power. It should be fulfilled now when the world is speedily becoming a global village, they said. About ongoing controversies between various leaders within the party, PPP General Secretary Jahangir Badar told Daily Times that these issues were also discussed and proposals in this regard had been framed. He said that the proposals would be announced after PPP Chairwoman Benazir Bhutto’s approval.

Apart from Badar, Aftab Shaban Meerani, Ali Nawaz Shah, Yousaf Talpur, Dr Fehmida Mirza, Balakh Sher Mazari, Abida Hussain, Sardar Asif Ahmed Ali, Latif Khosa, Raja Pervez Ashraf, Nawabzada Lashkari Raeesani, Masood Kausar, Adnan Bashir and Mian Abdul Waheed attended the think tank meeting. Sherry Rehman and Dr Safdar Abbasi missed the meeting.

Later, think tank members addressed local party leaders in the evening at a PPP Labour Bureau dinner at Balawal House. Raeesani said that Pakistan’s present situation was worse than in 1971 – when East Pakistan broke away as Bangladesh - which is why the PPP should speed up its mass awareness campaign against the government. “Now the country faces more problems than in the 70s, thus the party should work hard and speedily to meet its objective,” he said.

Abida Hussain said that Bhutto was among Pakistan’s biggest leaders and his mission should be completed by resisting dictatorship. “A people’s force is organising against the present rulers due to their increasing hatred of the armed forces, which once enjoyed a respectable position in this country,” she added.

The PPP could provide direction to that public force, she said. She said the armed forces and the second biggest power in Pakistan, the judiciary, would have to accept if people properly organised at the PPP platform. Sardar Asif Ahmed Ali said that the PPP was the only party that could bring the nation out of its present crisis. He said Gen Pervez Musharraf would hold presidential elections from the current assemblies because he knew that was the only way he could get re-elected president. “The all parties conference’s decisions will worsen General Pervez Musharraf’s position,” he said, though adding that the PPP’s participation in the conference was yet to be decided.

Badar told the dinner participants that the next three meetings of the PPP think tank would be held in Sindh, Balochistan and NWFP. He said the think tank would continue its consultations until the PPP achieved its objective of establishing real democracy in Pakistan. Before the dinner, PPP Punjab and Lahore officials inaugurated a PPP office at Old Anarkali besides addressing a public gathering at Kareem Park.

ISLAMABAD: Six workers of the main opposition Pakistan People's Party (PPP) were killed and two others injured when gunmen ambushed their van in the town of Attock, 120km west of the capital Islamabad.

PPP spokesman Farhatullah Babar said the attack was meant to frighten party workers in a district where Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz has said he will contest general elections that are due late this year or in early 2008.

"It seems to us that now the elections are near, a message has been sent to the PPP supporters to desist from supporting the party," Babar said.

"We demand the arrest of the culprits. One of the men murdered in the attack was a local office-bearer (a party leader at village level)," he said, adding the dead included three brothers.

Three of the party's workers were also killed in the same district during the by-elections in 2004 when Aziz won a national assembly seat, Babar said.

The moderate PPP, headed by former prime minister Benazir Bhutto, who lives in self-imposed exile in Dubai and London, is the largest opposition party in Pakistan.

Unidentified gunmen in Pakistan have killed six members of the main opposition Pakistan People's Party (PPP), police say.
They say that two other people were wounded in the attack.

The attack took place in the town of Attock, 120kms (57 miles) west of the capital, Islamabad.

A general election is due in Pakistan in late 2007 or early 2008, and rival political parties have already begun manoeuvring for support.

'Message sent'
Correspondents say that Pakistani elections are traditionally plagued by violence between rival supporters.

"We do not know what the motive is behind the attack. We are investigating," police spokesman Najab Khan told the AFP news agency.

Ms Bhutto has been told she cannot take part in the vote

PPP spokesman Farhatullah Babar said the attack was meant to frighten party workers there.

"It seems to us that now the elections are near, a message has been sent to the PPP supporters to desist from supporting the party," Mr Babar told AFP.

"We demand the arrest of the culprits. One of the men murdered in the attack was a local office-bearer (a party leader at village level)," he said, adding the dead included three brothers.

Correspondents say that three PPP workers were killed in the same district during the by-elections in 2004 when the current Prime Minister, Shaukat Aziz won a national assembly seat.

The PPP is led by former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto who has lived in self-imposed exile since 1998.

She has said she that will return for the election, although President Musharraf has warned that she will not be allowed to compete in the vote.

He has accused her of corruption during her time in office, but she denies the allegation.

In one of her addresses, Benazir Bhutto floated the idea of linking economic assistance with the holding of fair and free elections. This suggestion is likely to attract attention if serious doubts arise about the credibility of the election process

Elections provide the voters with an opportunity to elect their rulers and reaffirm the political system’s identification with democracy. However, the available evidence suggests that the forthcoming elections in Pakistan are not likely to give a free hand to the voters to choose between the present incumbents and the opposition.

The government is confident that it would secure an electoral endorsement for staying on for another five years. This is going to be an up-hill task, because the needs of securing an electoral victory do not always reconcile with the imperatives of holding fair and free elections.

The outcome of the presidential and parliamentary electoral exercises would have implications far beyond the territorial boundaries of this country. It will have a definite impact on efforts to control extremism and terrorism in and around Pakistan. As these issues are of direct interest to the West, especially the United States, international attention is likely to be focused on how Pakistan manages the elections.

There is another reason for the interest the US and the European Union are taking in the Pakistani elections. They have been supporting the Musharraf government since 2001-2002 in the context of the war against terrorism. This support has continued despite their current reservations about the Musharraf government’s approach towards Taliban activities in the Pakistani territory adjacent to Afghanistan.

However, if the Pakistan government fails to hold credible elections, these governments might distance themselves from the Musharraf government in order to avoid the embarrassment of elections mismanaged by the latter. They will be equally concerned if the elections cause street agitation and instability in Pakistan.

Traditionally, Pakistan’s military governments have used referenda and elections to civilianise and extend their rule and co-opt pliant political leaders. Ayub Khan and Zia-ul-Haq held carefully managed referenda to secure legitimacy for hanging on to power. General Pervez Musharraf pursued the same formula.

Though the political support base of the Musharraf government is narrow, not many people expect that it would be knocked out of power in the next elections. Military-dominated governments do not lose elections in Pakistan, especially when the president continues to hold on to the office of army chief.

As the president derives his main strength from the army the electoral exercise loses much of its relevance. His government has a clear advantage over the opposition because of its control over the bureaucratic apparatus and the availability of the civilian and military intelligence agencies. It can also use state patronage and resources to build electoral support.

A heavy reliance on these mechanisms is likely to cause serious doubts about the credibility of the elections. The domestic and foreign election monitors are expected to make a detailed review of the election process, covering the run-up to the elections as well as what happens on the polling day and the procedures for announcing the results. Their strategies will be based on the experience of the 2002 elections in Pakistan and recent elections in other evolving democracies.

If they come to the conclusion that the Pakistan vote was a dubious electoral exercise, the Musharraf government is expected to face major censure at that international level. This is likely to have serious implications for the government, which places a premium on building a soft image abroad and relies heavily on international economic and military assistance.

Several key issues require immediate attention for ensuring credible elections and safe democratic transition in Pakistan. The presidency and the federal government plan to seek General Pervez Musharraf’s re-election from the current parliament and provincial assemblies in total disregard of political ethics and the spirit of democracy. On top of this, the ruling Pakistan Muslim League (PML) and the federal cabinet want him to continue to hold on to the army command.

It is well known that President Pervez Musharraf went back on his commitment to quit as army chief and the PML managed new legislation to provide a legal cover to the combining of the two offices until 2007. This arrangement served the power interests of General Pervez Musharraf at the expense of democracy and constitutionalism.

If this arrangement remains in place it would amount to changing the basic character of the Constitution and exposing the military to criticism by the political circles and other societal groups.

The opposition parties are not expected to let the government get away with presidential elections from the current assembly. Most opposition members are expected to resign after the announcement of the schedule for the presidential elections. The opposition would not find it difficult to resign at this stage because the tenure of the National and Provincial Assemblies would expire shortly after the presidential election. The government would have to hold the presidential elections with an incomplete electoral college.

The opposition is also expected to launch protest meetings and marches against the presidential election. As the political situation would be geared to the elections, the opposition would find it relatively easy to launch a street agitation. Election-related activities could be easily turned into agitation against government policies.

The government will face additional pressures if Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Shairf decide to return to Pakistan after its electioneering in the run-up to the presidential election has gained momentum. As the government cannot afford to let these leaders engage in political mobilisation, it will have to rely on the coercive apparatus of the state to ward off this threat. It is difficult to predict the outcome of such a confrontation. However, the Musharraf-led government would be the main loser in the domestic and international context.

The presidency needs to undertake a dispassionate and realistic assessment of the domestic situation rather than rely on the PML’s advice that they would easily win the presidential and parliamentary elections. Pakistan’s domestic political situation is more troubled now than was the case in the 2002 elections. The opposition is more desperate now because the official plan of action does not give them any autonomous space. The government appears quite determined to restrain Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif from returning to Pakistan and leading their parties in the elections. Such a partisan approach and contravention of the spirit of the Constitution and democracy would not facilitate political continuity and stability.

Benzair Bhutto’s recent visit to Washington DC showed that Pakistan watchers in this city are concerned about Pakistan’s presidential and general elections. In one of her addresses, Benazir Bhutto floated the idea of linking economic assistance with the holding of fair and free elections. This suggestion is likely to attract attention if serious doubts arise about the credibility of the election process.

The number of votes it gets will not decide the future of the Musharraf government. What is going to matter most is how it manages these elections and if it can ensure that they are fair and free, giving an equal opportunity to all political parties to seek a popular mandate under the leaders of their choice.

Dr Hasan-Askari Rizvi is a political and defence analyst

It's boom time under the rule of General Pervez Musharraf. But can you ever really trust a dictator? Ahead of this year's elections, the novelist Mohsin Hamid takes an ambivalent look at the top cat who dragged his country into the 21st century

In Lahore, where I grew up, there were three distinct types that you found in every school and playground. The intellectuals were, by and large, known as chutiyas, a term which translates both literally and metaphorically into English as "pussies". Then there were the bubber shers. Though this is the Urdu word for lion, it is used mockingly more than admiringly, connoting not so much strength as overfed laziness. And then there were the true heroes, the studs; we called them cheetas and they were named, of course, after the cheetah, the deadly, fast-moving, great cat of Africa.

I was reminded of these teenage labels when I started to read In the Line of Fire, the autobiography of Pakistan's President, General Pervez Musharraf. I had expected bombastic, excessive prose from my supreme leader, but was surprised to find myself rather liking the man. I remain deeply concerned about the implications of his rule for the future of Pakistan, it is true, but insofar as he bears any similarity to the narrator, he strikes me as quite a pleasant sort of fellow to have as one's dictator.

On recent visits to the country, my younger relatives tell me that the taxonomy of weak chutiyas, fat bubber shers, and exalted cheetas is still in common use in Pakistan today. I hypothesised that Pervez Musharraf might well be a cheeta. To confirm this I first set out to compare the elements one would expect to find in the life story of a cheeta with those present in his book. From my training as a management consultant, I realised that such a benchmarking is best done within a framework. Accordingly, I devised the double-M double-I double-H (or MMIIHH) framework, which is composed of Mischievousness, Machismo, Impetuousness, Intelligence, Heart, and Honour.

Every cheeta I knew growing up took great delight in what we called "a bit of mischief". One favourite pastime was to throw raw eggs from automobiles at passing pedestrians (for the most part, impoverished manual labourers with no access to a change of clothes) in the dead of night, and then speed away, laughing. This was known as "egging". A true cheeta, even if he did not engage in egging himself, would at the very least come along for the ride and recount the story with some glee. Musharraf amply satisfies this requirement with anecdotes such as the one in which he is taught by his uncle how to go up to a "baldy" (in this case a "man [who] had oiled his bald pate, making matters worse, for it was shining like a mirror and inviting trouble"), "give him a tight smack right in the middle of his shiny head...[which] must have stung like hell", and get away without any consequences.

Yet an instinct for mischief alone does not a cheeta make. Escaping automobiles can sometimes stall and baldies can sometimes retaliate, and in such circumstances machismo is called for. The cheetas of my youth were perhaps most famous for their ability to take a beating while giving as good as they got in the face of overwhelming odds (having an arm fractured by a hockey-stick, for example, and still being able to break the other guy's nose). Musharraf is no exception. Whether joining "the street gangs" of Nazimabad (which he likens to the "South Bronx") as "one of the tough boys," or being told by a professional bodybuilder that he has "a most muscular physique", or leading his commandos through training exercises such as running at full speed "on a yard-wide beam 300ft high, spanning the top... of a metal bridge... with a fast river flowing underneath", he proves his machismo time and again. This serves him well in the face of multiple assassination attempts, which he confronts with remarkable equanimity. (omega)

Machismo leads, perhaps inevitably, to impetuousness. Impetuousness explains why so many of us in Lahore died at the wheel in automobile accidents at the ages of 16 and 17, before we were legally entitled to drive. It also explains why our national cricket team seems to have an endless supply of fast bowlers and a desperate lack of opening batsmen - a delivery left well alone is categorically not the mark of a cheeta. Here again Musharraf does not disappoint. Repeatedly in his autobiography, when confronted or slighted, he informs us he "saw red". After September 11, 2001, when made aware of Richard Armitage's statement that Pakistan would be "bombed back to the Stone Age" if it did not support the US, Musharraf has to resist telling the American official "to go forth and multiply, or words to that effect". And he does not always hold back. At a tense meeting of South Asian leaders he extends his hand, "on the spur of the moment", to Indian Prime Minister Vajpayee in apparent violation of diplomatic procedure, with the result that "a loud gasp of awe [and I daresay admiration] went through the hall, full of stuffy officialdom, that the prime minister of 'the largest democracy in the world' had been upstaged."

But impetuous as he is, a cheeta is no fool. He may not study, but he is invariably clever. A street-smart operator is a cheeta; a buffoon is a bubber sher. Perhaps it is this applied intelligence that explains why many of my schoolmates who were cheetas have done so well in the rough-and-ready world of Pakistani business, while many of the purely book-smart chutiyas of my acquaintance have been paralysed by over-analysis and now languish in less lucrative careers. Musharraf neatly captures the distinction when he points out, referencing Napoleon, that "two thirds of decision-making is based on study... but the other third is... based on one's gut". Moreover, like a true cheeta, he confesses of his youth, "if, from all this, you have concluded that I was not intensely focused on my studies, you would not be far wrong."

If mischievousness, machismo, impetuousness, and intelligence were their only attributes, cheetas would not be so popular. But there are two more: heart and honour. When I was growing up, a cheeta could be forgiven for getting into needless fights, doing excessive amounts of drugs, harassing girls, and generally causing mayhem - so long as he had a good heart. By good heart, what was meant was that a cheeta was true to those he loved: true to his family, his friends, his team, his country. This test Musharraf passes with flying colours. He has great loyalty to each of the units in which he serves, to the army as a whole, and to Pakistan - often to the point of risking his own life. He also writes of his compassion for the Bosnians while on a peacekeeping mission: "When the Pakistani Brigade Group... finally came, all its personnel fasted one day of every week, and distributed the food they had saved among the more needy Bosnians."

Similarly, honour is of great importance to the cheeta. The cheeta is expected to publicly assert that he always keeps his word. But unlike the more foolish bubber sher, who actually tries to fulfil his promises no matter how disastrous the consequences, the cheeta is expected to be more discerning. In practice, like a company issuing quarterly earnings reports, the cheeta must almost always do what he has said he will do but also be prepared on rare occasions to depart from expectations. This concept can rarely have been better expressed than by Musharraf in the following passage about a vow he made soon after becoming President: "I was quite serious when I announced that I would remove my army chief's hat... But events that soon began to unfold started putting serious doubts in my mind... Therefore, much against my habit and character, I decided to go against my word."

So the real question is not whether Musharraf is a cheeta. That he is, his autobiography makes abundantly clear. The real question is, what happens when a cheeta takes over one's country?

As it turns out, part of what happens is a great deal of good. When I first met the woman I would later marry and asked her what she did for a living, she told me that, among other things, she was an actress on television. We were in London, where she was visiting on holiday, and I remember being surprised. I had grown up in a Pakistan with only one television channel - conservative, state-run, and featuring newsreaders with veils atop their heads - and I personally knew no actresses. My wife-to-be informed me that she acted in a show called Jutt and Bond, an Urdu sitcom about a Punjabi folk hero and a debonair British secret agent, and that she was the love interest.

Like many men, I had always wanted to date a Bond girl. It took me less than a month to come up with a fictitious excuse for travelling to Lahore in hot pursuit. There, my wife-to-be exposed me to the incredible new world of media that had sprung up in Pakistan, a world of music videos, fashion programmes, independent news networks, cross-dressing talk-show hosts, religious debates, stock-market analysis, and dramas and comedies like Jutt and Bond. I knew, of course, that the government of Musharraf had opened the media to private operators. But I had not until then realised how profoundly things had changed.

Not just television, but also private radio stations and newspapers have flourished in Pakistan over the past few years. The result is an unprecedented openness. In cities like Lahore, Karachi, and Islamabad, young people are speaking and dressing differently. Views both critical and supportive of the government are voiced with breathtaking frankness in an atmosphere remarkably lacking in censorship. Public space, the common area for culture and expression that had been so circumscribed in my childhood, has now been vastly expanded. The Vagina Monologues was recently performed on stage in Pakistan to standing ovations.

Similarly, higher education has benefited from being opened to the private sector, as well as from a huge increase in state funding. After finishing her MA in journalism at Goldsmiths three years ago, my sister found herself with multiple teaching offers from universities back in Lahore. Our father, an economics professor for much of his professional life, says he cannot remember a time since the heady years of the 1960s when there was so much excitement in academia.

My sister's experience bears this out. Her salary, at around £50 a week, might not seem much by London standards. But it goes a long way in Lahore. A few years ago, top MBA graduates in Pakistan would have been lucky to earn that amount. And if my sister becomes a full professor or a department head, she can expect to earn far more. The sudden attractiveness of her profession is fuelling a surge of interest in pursuing research degrees. In the sciences and engineering alone, the government is expecting to graduate 1,500 doctoral students annually by 2010, a hundred-fold increase on the 1990s figure.

Going to speak at the small urban campus at which my sister teaches, I was taken aback by the subjects on offer. Students were studying to be beat reporters, literature professors, sound engineers, magazine editors, sculptors, and costume designers. They were putting on an original rock musical. And enrolment was soaring, with ever-increasing demand for places. My sister told me some of her students were working nights in the city's call centres to pay their tuition.

All of this has taken place against the backdrop of a staggering economic boom. Over the past five years, Pakistan's economy has been one of the fastest growing in the world. Foreign firms are investing billions of dollars in sectors such as telecoms, where Pakistani mobile-phone users have gone from under a million at the start of the decade to 30 million today. In London, one often reads of people of Pakistani descent travelling to Pakistan to attend terrorist training camps. Far more common, but virtually unreported, are the stories of successful Pakistan-born expatriates returning home for better financial prospects.

My buddy OH is one of them. An architect, he trained at the Rhode Island School of Design and joined a small firm in Boston for several years, working on projects ranging from baseball stadiums in the US to nightclubs in China to cliffside residences in Venezuela. But he wanted to be his own boss. So a couple of years ago he moved back to Lahore and started his own firm. Now he is so busy that he has to turn away assignments. "Nothing works here, yaar," he tells me. "It frustrates the hell out of you. But I love it. I wouldn't go anywhere else."

For despite the inefficiency of Pakistan's construction practices and the corruption of its bureaucracy, the skyline of Lahore is being transformed. With the economic boom has come a demand for offices, hotels, and housing. Gleaming new towers are beginning to rise out of deep pits in the fertile, alluvial soil of Lahore's newer neighbourhoods, dwarfing the slender minarets of the old walled city that feature so prominently in postcards and guidebooks.

All this, it seems, is the upside of having a cheeta for your president.

Why is it, then, given the remarkable progress made by Pakistan under Musharraf, that so few other countries are clamouring to be led by cheetas of their own? Perhaps it is because their people desire greater say in the running of national affairs. I recall my own participation in the referendum of 2002. Its purpose (omega) was to give Pakistanis a chance to decide whether Musharraf, who seized power in a coup in 1999, should continue to be President. I was in Islamabad at the time, so I cast my vote in Pakistan's capital.

I arrived at the polling station with the intention of voting in support of Musharraf. My reasons were threefold. First, it was shortly after September 11, and the invasion of Afghanistan, and I felt Pakistan needed strong leadership if we were to avoid the fate that had befallen our neighbour. Second, I approved of what appeared to be a genuinely progressive approach that the government was taking in a number of areas. Third, I thought that returning to the rule of either Benazir Bhutto or Nawaz Sharif, the democratically elected Prime Ministers who had presided over the decline of Pakistan's economy and institutions in the 1990s, would be an unmitigated disaster.

I immediately noticed at the polling station that staff far outnumbered voters. Indeed, my sister and I seemed to be the only voters there. I showed my identity card, had my finger marked with indelible ink, and was given a ballot to take with me into a booth. I expected a simple: "Pervez Musharraf for President: yes or no?" Instead, I encountered the following text: "For the survival of the local government system, establishment of democracy, continuity of reforms, end to sectarianism and extremism, and to fulfil the vision of Quaid-e-Azam, would you like to elect President General Pervez Musharraf as President of Pakistan for five years?"

As I struggled to decipher what precisely it was that I was being asked, a man came in and ordered me to hurry up. I had seen him lurking about the entrance to the polling station, but he was not one of the officials. "Who are you?" I asked him. "Can't you see I'm voting? Get out of here."

He eyes hardened. "People are waiting," he said

"What people? There's half a dozen booths here and one voter."

"I said," he snarled, "hurry up."

"Who the hell are you? Get out of my face." I appealed to the officials. "I'm trying to exercise my right as a citizen. I need my privacy. Who is this person? Why don't you do something about him?"

The officials seemed alarmed by all this but did nothing to intervene. The man was clearly a soldier or policeman in plainclothes. He evoked in me that typically belligerent Pakistani reaction to being ordered around for no reason, the product no doubt of our history of colonialism and dictatorship. So we exchanged unpleasantries for a bit. Eventually he stepped back, although not as far as I would have liked, and I voted, although not as quickly as he would have liked, and that was that.

My sister emerged from the women's section and we left. In the 10 minutes we had spent at the polls, neither of us had seen another voter. Yet when the results of the referendum were announced, the country was told not only that 97 per cent of votes had been in support of Musharraf, but that the turnout had been 43 million people, or a massive 56 per cent of the electorate. These figures were so obviously ridiculous that even someone who had actually voted for the man, as I had (having resisted the urge to change my mind in protest at the low-grade intimidation I experienced), felt deeply disheartened by the exercise.

Rigged elections rankle, of course. But surely it is churlish to keep insisting on democracy when the cities one visits, the metropolises of Lahore, Karachi, and Islamabad, are witnessing a boom unlike any in recent memory? The problem is that there is more to Pakistan than its cities. And it is in the hinterlands to the west of the country, in the provinces bordering Afghanistan, that the downside of cheeta-style military rule becomes most apparent.

In 2004, I made a reporting trip out to Gwadar in Pakistan's Balochistan province. Gwadar is one of the government's showcase development projects, a deep-water port and model city being constructed with Chinese help on the site of a small fishing village near the straits of Hormuz, through which most of the world's oil flows. The province is also home to an insurgency against the perceived heavy-handedness of the central government in general and the army in particular. I arrived shortly after a bomb had killed several of the Chinese engineers who were working on the port.

I expected to find strong anti-Pakistani sentiment. I found nothing of the sort. Children were even playing street cricket in the uniforms of the Pakistan national team. But while I was in Gwadar I was stopped and questioned menacingly by a pair of undercover security operatives. No outright threat was made, but the tone of the encounter was so unsettling that I later complained of it over the telephone in a call home I made from a payphone.

Overhearing me, a shopkeeper and his cousin began to commiserate. They told me of daily rudeness and regular beatings at the hands of the security forces. "We think of ourselves as Pakistanis," one of them said, "but they treat us like terrorists." And then, out of sympathy for what I had experienced, they refused to let me pay for my lunch.

I left Gwadar deeply concerned about the consequences of the confrontational approach being taken by the government to the unrest in Pakistan's western provinces. Of course, the state must act when faced with violence and terrorism. But it must also guard against the abuse of power by its security forces, and it must hold back from victimising entire populations in the pursuit of a few criminals.

Unfortunately, cheetas are not known for their restraint.

Since the schoolyard is the cheeta's typical stomping-ground, it may be useful to compare the rule of Musharraf to the reign of a bully in a rough inner-city secondary school. For a time, if the bully is a progressive and fair-minded one, some benefits may accrue. Other ruffians may become less likely to steal the lunch money of their classmates. Weak children with glasses may feel less frightened as they head off to class in the mornings. But resentment against the bully will grow, and eventually someone stronger will come along - or someone weaker will get his hands on a knife - and the bully will be replaced.

Acknowledgment of the bully's short shelf-life is implicit in the title Musharraf has chosen for his book, In the Line of Fire. What he seems not to understand are the implications of this: the urgent need, if his policies are to survive him, to broaden his support base and to plan for a Pakistan without him at its helm. In this he is following in the footsteps of the many army chiefs who have preceded him as dictators of Pakistan, men like Ayub Khan and Zia-ul-Haq, very different in their policies but very similar in their failure to bequeath lasting national institutions or to provide a sustainable platform for Pakistan's growth.

"The issue of democracy is a recent, post-Cold War obsession of the West," Musharraf writes. "I am still struggling to convince the West that Pakistan is more democratic today than it ever was in the past." Yet the issue of democracy is more than merely a recent obsession of the West. It was fundamental to the notion of Pakistan as envisaged by our nation's founder, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, before the Cold War had even begun. And it is not just the West that is unconvinced Pakistan is democratic today; Pakistanis like myself are unconvinced as well.

Democracy matters because without it the entire nation is in the line of fire, one bullet away from unpredictable change. And it matters because even progressive policies feel illegitimate to broad swathes of the nation's population when they are dictated by a president with a general's stars on his shoulders. There are trade-offs to be made when one allows scantily dressed models to walk the catwalks of Lahore but empowers the security forces to seize people on the streets of Balochistan merely for looking suspicious. And these trade-offs must be decided upon by the nation as a whole.

It is the cheeta's natural inclinations away from inclusiveness and consensus that perhaps best explain why so few cheetas have proven popular with democratic electorates. But these values are of paramount importance in a country as vast and diverse as Pakistan, the world's sixth largest by population. We are increasingly divided between our more prosperous and progressive cities to the east and our more restive and conservative tribal areas to the west. Bridging our divisions has become essential.

Pakistanis are scheduled to go to the polls again in 2007, our 60th year of independence. I for one would like to see models continuing to walk the catwalks. But I would also like to see whether the rest of the country agrees. If he wants to leave a lasting legacy, Pervez Musharraf would do well to put in place the preconditions for truly free and fair elections and to build alliances with politicians based on a shared vision of the future rather than on a willingness to support a President in uniform.

Cheetas are celebrated for their speed, not for their endurance. Paradoxically, it is only by laying the foundations for his democratic departure that Musharraf is likely to be an exception.

Mohsin Hamid's novel, 'The Reluctant Fundamentalist', is published by Hamish Hamilton in March

ISLAMABAD: The upcoming general elections in Pakistan would not be free and fair as long as a serving army chief continues to occupy the president’s post, keeps popular political leaders away from the electoral process and refuses to take steps for holding credible elections, said Benazir Bhutto, chairwoman of the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP).

Addressing a meeting at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) in Washington on Thursday, Benazir said that by supporting military dictatorship in Pakistan, the West was inadvertently promoting militancy and terrorism. “If the West wants to win the war on terror it must support genuine democratisation in Pakistan and demand transparent elections in which all political parties and leaders are allowed to contest,” she said.

The PPP leader said that her party had submitted proposals for holding transparent elections to the chief election commissioner, but he had not yet responded to them. Benazir said that the government spokesman had invited suggestions from political parties for free elections, but there had been no response to the opposition’s proposals.

She said that the peace treaty in Waziristan had failed because terrorism incidents were increasing in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The former prime minister claimed that several people in Pakistan had started suspecting President General Pervez Musharraf’s sincerity in his claims of moderation and fight against terrorism. “The general had backed out from his commitment to amend the blasphemy law, reform the madrassas and banning extremist organisations, she said.

Benazir said the Charter of Democracy signed by the opposition parties aimed at strengthening the federation, ending the military’s role in politics and bringing the state’s intelligence agencies under parliament’s control. online

Last week, while addressing a siasi jalsa in Okara, President Musharraf declared that general elections will be held this year. He refrained from mentioning the timeframe for his own re-election. That, ostensibly a deliberate omission, has triggered a flurry of statements by the government ministers and opposition leaders speculating on the timeframe and method of presidential election.

Senator Mushahid Hussain Syed, who is also the secretary-general of the PML-Q, has said that the country needs President General Pervez Musharraf and he will be elected president again by the present assemblies later this year.

Federal Minister Ijazul Haq said in Medina that the present assemblies will elect the next president. Punjab Chief Minister Chaudhry Pervez Elahi has declared that it is our duty to keep electing uniformed President Musharraf again and again, even ten times, because his election guarantees the security of the country.

Dr Sher Afgan Khan is playing a different tune. He has disclosed that if Iran was attacked, the tenure of the current assemblies would be extended by one year under the emergency clause of the constitution. He has rejected the leadership of Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain declaring that Musharraf is our (PPP-Patriots) leader. He has made unwarranted and unsolicited comparison between President Musharraf and President Zia. According to him, President Musharraf is a straightforward and clear-cut general who never exploited Islam, while President Zia was a hypocrite and a big liar.

Former caretaker prime minister and PML-Q president Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, who was recently in Paris for medical check up has said that doctors have give him clean bill of health. He said now he would play his innings with more vigour. How will Dr Afgan fit in the PML-Q if he does not recognise Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain as his leader?

Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain has reiterated that the PML-Q would decide in due course of time about the next prime minister. It means that in the case of the PML-Q, the people would go to vote without knowing who would be the party's prime ministerial candidate. It is a little odd because it is usually the would-be prime minister who leads the election campaign with the clear-cut knowledge that if his party won, he would be elected as prime minister. Perhaps Chaudhry sahib is having different thoughts after getting a clean bill of health.

Benazir Bhutto on the other hand has come out with a different hypothesis about the re-election of President Musharraf. She is of the view that the tenure of President Musharraf expires in Dec 2008. According to her, presidential elections held before that date would be illegal. She explained that President Musharraf first took oath of office in 2000 when he replaced President Rafig Tarar. He was re-elected after the referendum for five years and again in 2003 for another five years. His term, she said, therefore expires in Dec 2008. She said that nobody, including the government and the federal cabinet, has the authority to hold presidential elections before the date as set in the constitution. Benazir Bhutto has stated that even the Election Commission and the judiciary cannot hold presidential elections before the constitutionally scheduled dates.

Benazir Bhutto has suddenly become big-hearted towards President General Musharraf. She says that constitutionally his present tenure ends in Dec 2008 so he cannot have his re-election before that date. She has offered gratis legal advice -- that the presidential post is not up for election until Dec 2008. It is a little complicated legal innovation and the court would be the right forum to find the answer to the tenure riddle. However, there could be a catch in this seemingly generous offer. Perhaps Benazir Bhutto wants the next assemblies to decide the fate of President Musharraf rather than the present docile assemblies.

Although Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi, Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, Shaukat Aziz and scores of other government ministers have stated repeatedly that President Musharraf will be re-elected by the current assemblies, the president himself has not uttered a word so far on this matter. Obviously, he is keeping his options open and would decide on his re-election and uniform at the time of his choosing.

Air Marshal Asghar Khan told a press conference a few days ago that politicians who have received money from the ISI should be disqualified from elections. He has appealed to the Chief Justice of Pakistan that a writ petition filed by him 10 years ago about this matter should be heard. In his petition, Asghar Khan has reportedly given the names of the beneficiaries of a government slush fund of over Rs140 million. He has asked the court that this money should be recovered from the recipients with interest.

I have no idea that taking money from the government or its agencies is a wrongdoing, a criminal act. And who is committing the crime: the giver or taker of the money. I think it is time the Supreme Court settles this matter once and for all.

Qazi Hussain Ahmed, chief of the JI and the MMA, has complained that politicians have become victims of tension and consequently patients of heart ailments due to the bad policies and attitude of the government towards politicians. Disagreeing with this, Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz has said that politicians who suffer from tension should change their lifestyle. In this context, they should abandon what he called negative politics and adopt positive thinking.

Qazi sahib ought to realise that his statements, which come aplenty, are the major source of national tension. Hardly a day goes by when he does not threaten million-strong march on Islamabad or resignations from assemblies. He rejects the authority of the parliament to legislate and instead wants to arrogate legislative powers to himself. To be certain, he is harming his own cause by indulging in such rhetoric. In the matter of resignations, the proverbial phrase 'to be hoist by one's own petard' aptly applies to Qazi sahib.

The prestigious Young Presidents Organisation of Canada has conferred the 'Global Leadership Award 2007' on President Musharraf in recognition of his outstanding services for world peace and leadership qualities. The leader leads and is not led as President Musharraf has shown time and again. His decision to wage jihad against terrorism after 9/11 was not popular but later events proved how right he was. He saved the country from impending catastrophe by joining the world community against terrorism and extremism. His Kashmir initiative has brought peace to the region. His domestic policies have empowered Pakistani women politically and economically. The abrogation of laws which are discriminatory against women or minorities is also a reflection of his leadership qualities.

The writer is a freelance columnist. Email: mirjrahman@yahoo.com

We need to step out of the parameters of the former democratic paradigm to get more from General Musharraf's regime than the crushed essence of democracy extracted from the people and vested in mufti/khaki. Yet Ms Bhutto and Mian Nawaz, whose leadership role none can deny within political paradigms past, present and future still speak in terms of the political process that revolved around them as if elections that included both and returned one or the other as majority leader would satisfy popular demand.

Even if seven years were not a long time, 9/11 and Pakistan's entanglement with the war on terror make fresh definitions of political posture and purpose an imperative. If Pakistan's exiled leaders continue to approach local re-engagement in the vocabulary and moods of yesteryear they could return only to demonstrate obsolescence. What could suit the regime better?

In debating current legislation such as the Women's Protection Bill (WPB) the PPP and PML-N restricted discussion to areas determined by a regime independent of the public pulse. Leaders whose relevance derives from connectivity with the people cannot afford the insensitivity to public opinion leaders with military backup enjoy.

When Ms Bhutto and Mr Sharif chose to have the party faithful contest the elections in 2002 they may have been thinking of a lesson learnt when the PPP did not contest General Zia's 'party-less' elections. What they failed to anticipate was that the opposition in parliament would inevitably be weighed in the same scale as the treasury. The electorate finds both sides wanting. The parliamentary opposition has only been effectual in support of the regime: the MMA when endorsing President Musharraf in uniform and the PPP in going along with the WPB.

It is one of those unforeseen political ironies that personal disbarment from this inert parliament helped keep both Ms Bhutto and Mr Sharif vibrant. Nonetheless, doubts surround their own and their parties' capacity outside parliament to challenge the existing political mode.

It is not just a matter of street power. Whenever Ms Bhutto and Mr Sharif do return the first thought people would have is: why now if not then? To make use of Pakistan's expressive political idiom: Is the General's quasi-democracy co-opting another B-team?

People crave a depoliticised military. Without that change electoral transitions cannot serve Pakistan's true need: A polity that recognises civil rights in a state that is sovereign and felt as such because the citizen, not his COAS, president or prime minister feels sovereign. Without popular participatory democratic empowerment Pakistan is a failed state for its citizens even if it is reassuringly safe from being categorised rogue and its mainstream democratic leaders regain local presence.

But does the supreme national interest of our politically anaemic and sadly weakened Pakistan now demand that leadership first satisfy external auditors? And is that why hopeful exiles work harder at persuading outsiders of their value than on seeking a direct appeal to the people? This makes the public suspect American policy interests need new surrogates.

For although General Musharraf was rather clever about not declaring martial law -- functioning de facto as a military dictator while crafting his way through constitutional exigencies -- he has been clever too long. He has boxed himself into a corner where no one is sure what he truly endorses other than his own continuity which is underwritten by simple force: the power of the army he will not stop commanding and the power of the sole superpower that lauds his rule. The interaction of his two constituencies scarcely requires popular consent.

Anything other than a military government would not have survived the events his regime is identified with in Balochistan and the NWFP. Why then pressure to effect a more convincing democratic arrangement? Ironically that is becoming the exigency of the sole superpower. Force is but a tamp in a bleeding wound and liable to saturation and the problem with Talibanism is nowhere near settled.

Tackling misapplied fundamentalism was not a survival priority for General Musharraf after he seized political office so he ignored it. One consequence of that initial inactivity is that his patrons suspect there was a core of aggressive orthodoxy in his military constituency he feared to tackle or did not mind leaving intact. Possibly he thought the ousted Mr Sharif could have exploited Islamist sentiment, although the religious factor (like the ethnic one) in Pakistan's politics is traditionally used to thwart civil democracy. Without army backing both factors lack critical mass. This last though may no longer hold good.

General Zia's internal politics skilfully conflicted democracy and Islam and his Kabul engagement was perceived as anti-Marxism. The popular mood resembles the one the PNA exploited to the hilt in toppling Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. The problem is the jihadis who suited their western utilisers then and are no longer considered user-friendly.

That is the bind for opposition leaders: They have to persuade Pakistan's disenchanted public they are not as subordinated by the US as the existing regime at the same time as they persuade the extremely active American interests at work in the region that they can tackle the job of containing local fanaticism for them better than the general with his current setup.

The prerequisite is to get the factors right: hidden extraneous and missing. An honest election would help establish these. The glaringly apparent common factor is that khaki-blended is never civil. Should Ms Bhutto or the Sharifs ignore that they will be of no use as tuning forks for anybody in Pakistan's dissonant political context?


The writer is a freelance columnist. Email: rifaath@super.net.pk

WASHINGTON: Pakistan's ex-Premier and PPP Chairperson Ms Benazir Bhutto has said that no fair and just general elections are possible in the country under the umbrella of a president in uniform and without the popular leadership of country.

Addressing a luncheon at American Enterprise Institute Washington on Friday, she said that the West acquiesced to the autocratic rule in Pakistan and thus empowered it consequently.

“The West should favour the real democracy in Pakistan, if it wants the upper hand in the fight against terror,” she said adding that such elections should be supported that entitled all parties to an equal opportunity for taking part therein.

Ms Bhutto warned the world community of the same situation in Pakistan as that of Afghanistan, if it continues to support the dictatorship in Pakistan for just short-term interests.

PPP chairperson said that the peace treaty in Waziristan fizzled out and the terrorist activities are on the surge in both Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The government has gone back on the promises regarding banning the extremist organizations and reformation of madaris, she added.

MMA to participate in APC
Meanwhile, a report from Okara says that Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MM) leader Hafiz Hussain Ahmed said Friday that MMA would inevitably participate in All Parties Conference (APC) headed by whether Ms Benazir Bhutto or Mian Nawaz Sharif.

Talking to journalists here, he said that Benazir’s deal with the government has fizzled out, adding that once the differences between Mian Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto were of serious nature.

Expressing his desire for the sustained coalition of MMA and ARD, Hafiz Hussain Ahmed said he does not want separation between Mian and BB either.

“We would demand the army to stop President Musharraf from canvassing for the Pakistan Muslim League (Q), in case chief election commissioner fails in restricting him,” he remarked.

MMA coalition is strong and is destined to stay, while the government needs to take care of its coalition, he added.

Feb. 7, 2007: Slamming the West for supporting the "dictatorship" of President Pervez Musharraf, former premier Benazir Bhutto has said that by doing so they have "empowered" the General to defy the world and "cooperate" with the forces of terror.

"By acquiescing to the Musharraf dictatorship, the west has empowered him to defy the world and cooperate with the forces of terror. West chooses to apply human rights standards when politically expedient," the PPP leader said.

"By supporting military dictatorship the west was inadvertently supporting militancy and terrorism," she said in her address to the John Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies in the US yesterday.

Bhutto said the international support for the military dictatorship in Pakistan for short-term strategic reasons was a mistake.

ISLAMABAD 2/5/2007: The Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) leaders have warned President Gen Pervez Musharraf to hold free and fair general elections otherwise there would be an ‘Orange Revolution’ in Pakistan akin to the people’s movement against poll rigging in Ukraine in 2004.

They were speaking at a seminar titled ‘Democracy and Elections’ organised by the Shaheed Bhutto Foundation (SBF) of the party to launch the booklet ‘How Elections Are Rigged in Pakistan’.

The booklet elaborates on how state machinery and resources have been used for pre-poll, poll and post-poll rigging.

I A Rehman, chairman of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) who was chief guest at the seminar, said political parties should not wait for the elections and advised them to launch their struggle now because there could be no free and fair polls under Gen Musharraf.

“The government, in my opinion, has already completed half of its homework for the general elections and will complete the remaining half before the day of the election.

“No drama can be called election in a country where corruption is legalised, judiciary is under control and there is no law or constitution in place,” he said.

Rehman said that keeping political leaders in exile out of the race was also a form of rigging.

Aitzaz Ahsan, member of central executive committee of the PPP, said that the establishment had always rigged elections.

“In Pakistan, power has always remained in GHQ and President’s House with dummy and powerless prime ministers playing to their tunes,” he said.

Ahsan said the current regime had not only rigged the elections but also rigged the constitution with the 17th Amendment in connivance with mullahs.

The PPP leader warned that if the PPP and its allies were stopped in the elections through unfair means, there would be an ‘Orange Revolution’ and nobody would be able to stop them.

“We will contest the elections for the empowerment of the people rather than getting the government,” he said.

Mian Raza Rabbani, deputy secretary-general of the PPP, accused the regime of depriving people of their vote by ignoring them in the electoral rolls, especially in areas where the PPP had strong support.

“There are reports that about 2.5 million people have been disenfranchised in the new voter lists,” he said.

Sherry Rehman, PPP information secretary, said that boycotting the elections was an option but they were in favour of change by a free and fair vote.

Farhatullah Babar, spokesman of PPP Chairperson Benazir Bhutto, said the party was compiling a compendium of missing people and those who kidnapped them.

Earlier, Bhutto has asked Pakistan Muslim League-N Patron-in-Chief Nawaz Sharif to put his proposed All Parties Conference (APC) on hold till an “appropriate time”, political sources said here yesterday.

Islamabad February 7, 2007: "Mis-governance by dictatorship has made the life of citizens miserable as terror and crime stark the land as never before" said Chairperson Pakistan Peoples Party and former Prime Minister Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto in a statement today while condemning the armed attack on Islamabad airport on Tuesday.

She said that the PPP demands immediate probe into the armed attack on airport in the capital and arrest of the culprits and masterminds adding, ‘it is simply unacceptable that crime and terror increased on a daily basis while the regime spent time scheming how to get a serving military chief re-elected as President from the same Assemblies’.

The former Prime Minister said that the worsening law and order and surge in terror were the result of unrepresentative government. Dictatorship in itself is based on terrorism and terrorists find safe heaven in a dictatorship, she said.

She said that while rulers were luxuriating ordinary citizens had been thrown before the criminals and extremists as the law and situation had gone haywire in the country and the life of no body was safe.

The Pakistan Peoples party condemns the worsening law and order situation in the country and calls upon the regime to attend o its basic job of ensuring the safety and security of people instead of wasting national resources and time on witch hunting of political opponents.

She said that almost daily there were gruesome incidents of terror, murder, mayhem, dacoity and robbery right under the nose of the law enforcing agencies but the regime failed to take any action against the criminals who were thriving.

The PPP Chairperson demanded zero tolerance for crime, which she said could come when a representative government was in place that was accountable to the people.

She called upon the youth of the country to come forward and help the PPP in regaining the lost rights of the people.

She asked the people to support the PPP and resist regime’s attempt to rig the polls so that the nation could be rid of extremism through the collective will and action of the people.

She said that the PPP had courageously taken on the criminal elements from Khyber to Karachi and broken their back but after the overthrow of the PPP government criminals, mafias and terrorists and extremists had once again reared their heads, she said.

Islamabad February 7, 2007: Former Prime Minister and Chairperson of the Pakistan Peoples Party Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto has said that democracy in Pakistan and the Muslim world at large was crucial at this point of time to avert the dangers posed to its future by terrorism and sectarianism.

She was addressing the John Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies in the US Tuesday afternoon on the subject of 'Pakistan: Politicially at the Cross Roads'.

The democratization of Pakistan is important to the war against terror, to the interpretation of Islam as a message of freedom and enlightenment as well as to the empowerment of the people of Pakistan, she said.

She said there was an opportunity this year for the restoration of democracy because of the general elections. Free and fair elections were critical for the restoration of democracy and that is why the PPP had prepared a paper which she said must be adopted by the rulers if they were really committed to holding free and fair polls as claimed by it. She said that the Party was still waiting to hear from the Chief Election commissioner to whom a copy of the paper had already been sent.

The best exit route for the Musharraf’s military regime was to adopt the ARD demand that a national government be formed to hold fair and free elections with election reforms as suggested by the Opposition.

It has become vital to save the federation from disintegration, terrorism and poverty and this could be done through holding a free, fair and transparent elections under an impartial and independent Election Commission. She asked the Chief Election Commission to take notice of pre-rigging efforts of the government party including the campaign by General Musharraf in favour of the King’s Party. She said that the nation needed and deserved free and transparent elections.

She said that the Opposition believes that the elections cannot be free and fair under an army Chief occupying the office of the President. She said that the assemblies elected for five years terms couldn’t elect a President twice giving him ten years as President. She said that the government should read the writing on the wall as international analysts are of the view that holding free and fair elections may result in the victory for the Pakistan Peoples Party.

She said that by acquiescing to the Musharaf dictatorship, the west has empowered him to defy the world and cooperate with the forces of terror.

Unfortunately, we do not always view the world -- its peoples, its cultures and its religions -- with a single moral standard, she said adding that the West chooses to apply human rights standards when politically expedient, not as a central and universal principle of policy.

By supporting military dictatorship the west was inadvertently supporting militancy and terrorism, she said.

Regarding her achievement during the two tenures in the government she said that revolution in information technology, integration into the global economy, attracting over 20 billion dollars in foreign investments, particularly in power generation, eradication of polio and dramatic reduction in infant mortality were some of the achievements. Outlawing domestic violence, establishing special women's police forces to protect and defend the women and appointment of women judges to our nation's benches for the first time in its history were the achievements of PPP governments under her leadership..

Debunking the claim of moderation she said, “We cannot claim to believe in moderate enlightenment if we do not fight for it in our own homelands. We cannot say Islamabad respects human rights. While elected Prime Ministers are forced into exile, we cannot say Pakistan has human rights. While NAB finds corruption only in the opposition and not in the ruling party, we cannot say Pakistan has Justice”.

She said that international support for the military dictatorship in Pakistan for short-term strategic reasons was a mistake. Afghanistan was a tragic case in point of how retreating from the principles of human rights and democracy can have the most tragic unanticipated consequences.

The goal of the international community’s foreign policy agenda must also be to simultaneously promote stability and to strengthen democratic values -- not selectively but universally, not just because it is convenient but also because it is right, she said.

About the political situation in Pakistan she said that military dictatorship has resulted in the domination of the country's political, financial and social class by the military. Twenty five years of military rule since 1977 had led to the rise of extremist religious parties, militancy, poverty, hunger, unemployment, conflict and sectarianism she said, adding, “only by the restoration of civilian control and supremacy the tide could be reversed”.

On relations with India she said that the PPP supported peaceful and negotiated settlement of all disputes between India and Pakistan.

It was during the PPP government that extraordinary progress was made with the fist nuclear confidence building treaty not to attack each other’s nuclear facilities. Borders were reopened to travel and tourism, and a South Asian preferential tariff agreement that established a free-trade zone between Pakistan, India and the other nations of the region was adopted. She said that the PPP government also called upon all the nations of the region to declare the sub-continent a nuclear free zone.

The PPP government she said was making dramatic progress in relations with India and with containing terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan but moderation and progress is not what supporters of military dictatorship tolerate.

A democratic and stable Pakistan, gaining strength economically and moving forward socially under a popular government was their threat. The PPP government was eliminated and every attempt made to eliminate the Party and its leadership, she said.

She said that restoration of democracy in Pakistan was lined with stability in Pakistan and Afghanistan. In this context she said that the peace treaty with elements in the Waziristan had failed because act of terrorism both in Pakistan and Afghanistan not only continued to take place but were even stepped up in intensity. She said that the poor and the middle classes could prosper only in an atmosphere of peace and tranquillity in which the people were not held hostage to militancy.

The former Prime Minister also called upon the moderate forces in both the Muslim and the Non Muslim world to cooperate to promote equality and religious tolerance. “We can do this only if we adhere to the values of democracy, equality and development on a non discriminatory and non-selective basis”.

She said that the Charter of Democracy signed by the majority of the Opposition is a document, which strengthens the federation, guarantees justice for all and peace and development for the people of Pakistan.

The lesson of the history is that democracy and development go together. Democracy gives the country honour and pride whereas dictatorship leads to neglect of peoples problems, undermining of the armed forces and culmination of conflicts of several types.

She said that through freedom and the rule of law Pakistan can return to the path of progress and development.

It is time to get our priorities right and putting country’s resources into education, health and providing the necessities of life to the people, she said.

Monday, February 5, 2007: In the months after Sept. 11, 2001, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf was a new and shaky U.S. ally. He decided to side with the Bush administration against al-Qaeda, but there were persistent reports that elements of his army still supported the Afghan Taliban. He was an autocratic ruler who had seized power in a military coup against a democratic government, but in a televised speech to his nation in January 2002, he promised to turn Pakistan into a tolerant, "moderate Muslim" society. Largely because it had little choice, the Bush administration decided to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Five years later, little in Pakistan has changed. Musharraf is still promising a moderate and tolerant regime -- but there are still reports that his army is quietly helping the Taliban. He's also still promising democracy -- but just as in 2002, he's preparing to rig Pakistan's upcoming presidential and parliamentary elections to ensure that his term is extended and his power unchallenged.

What has changed is the response of the Bush administration. Five years ago it portrayed itself as giving Musharraf a chance to perform. Now it defends and apologizes for the general, despite his chronic failure to deliver.

The most recent example of this came 10 days ago, during a visit to the country by Deputy Assistant Secretary of State John Gastright. Islamabad was in an uproar over the news that Musharraf intends to seek a new five-year term next fall in a way that most of the country's civilian politicians consider undemocratic and unconstitutional. The other subject of conversation was legislation passed by the Democratic-controlled U.S. House during its "100 hours" blitz. It would condition future aid to the Pakistani military on Bush's certification that Pakistan "is making all possible efforts to prevent the Taliban from operating in areas under its sovereign control."

The House measure, backed by the new Foreign Affairs Committee chairman, California's Tom Lantos, was a logical response to recent reports by U.S. commanders that the Taliban leadership is based in Pakistan and that cross-border movements of insurgents are increasing. But Gastright rushed to assure Musharraf's government that the administration opposed it. "The president can certify that," Gastright said of the Taliban metric without explaining the basis for his confidence. "The issue is, he shouldn't have to."

Gastright went on to endorse what he said were steps by Musharraf to promote press and political freedom ahead of the elections: "That's an impressive track record," the Associated Press quoted him as saying. Then he said the administration was pleased with Musharraf's handling of the greatest criminal proliferator of nuclear weapons in history, A.Q. Khan, who was quickly pardoned in 2004 and then shielded from U.S. or U.N. interrogation. Musharraf had "a superb record addressing the legacy of the A.Q. Khan network," Gastright said.

It's at this point in a column like this that administration officials pop up to point out that the relationship with Musharraf is "complicated," that he has the right intentions and that he needs to be supported as well as urged to do more. Whatever his performance or lack of it, the argument goes, Musharraf is better than the alternatives in Pakistan, which include Islamic extremists and anti-Western generals. It's the same argument that's used to defend continued U.S. pandering to Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.

In Musharraf's case it's particularly perverse. That's because the second most popular leader in Pakistan behind Musharraf, according to polling by the International Republican Institute, is not an Islamist but former prime minister Benazir Bhutto, the leader of the moderate and pro-Western Pakistan People's Party. Bhutto and her party have made it clear that they would be willing to accept Musharraf in exchange for fair parliamentary elections and an end to criminal charges that keep Bhutto in exile. The PPP and the Muslim League party of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif have formed the Alliance for Restoration of Democracy; they are the obvious partners for a government that genuinely aims to modernize the country and marginalize Islamic extremism.

Only Musharraf refuses to deal with them. His supporters say he intends to extend his mandate by staging a presidential vote by the existing parliament and provincial assemblies -- which make up Pakistan's equivalent of the electoral college -- though they were elected in the rigged balloting of 2002 and their terms expire on the same day as the president's. For that maneuver he won't need Bhutto or Sharif or their parties -- and so he won't have to meet their demands for fair parliamentary elections.

In private, the Bush administration has been urging Musharraf for some time to come to terms with Pakistan's moderate democrats. And they've been asking him for years to stop allowing sanctuary for the Taliban. He's not responding. So what's wrong with congressional conditions? They might just produce what's been missing from Musharraf the past five years: results.

Islamabad February 5, 2007: Spokesperson of the PPP has isued the following statement today.

“Former Prime Minister and Chairperson of the Pakistan Peoples Party Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto has not formally announced the date of her return to Pakistan as reported in a segment of the media today.

“Once the election schedule is announced, the Media office of the Chairperson will announce the date of her return”.

London: The dawn of 2007 has not brought any happier tidings in the global atmosphere strewn with terrorism, divisiveness, sectarianism, greater schism between people of different races and religions, deepening of polarization, confrontation, intolerance and the gradual build up of a class war between the haves and have-nots. One of the worst areas afflicted with all the above mentioned ailments is Pakistan and the adjoining region that includes Afghanistan.

It was more than conspicuous that General Pervez Musharraf’s overall performance in American war against terrorism did not deserve any iota of mention by President Bush in his state of the union address. Not only the General was ignored so was Islamabad despite it being in the front line of the anti-terrorism war.

The message from Washington is obviously very clear. Its lack of praise for its key ally –especially for one who owes his political existence, fig-leaf of legitimacy and credibility entirely to President Bush’ acceptance of him as his Knight Templar—seems to be a clear manifestation of the growing realization that Islamabad remains stubbornly as part of the problem of global terrorism rather than a solution.

Despite careful diplomatic wordings that are being used officially vis-à-vis Pakistan’s role and General Musharraf’s balancing act, other important means, however, have been unleashed to call a spade a spade and expose Islamabad’s duplicity in the game of terror. When the American intelligence Czar John D. Negroponte declares Pakistan as the heaven for Al-Qaeda and when Washington Post –among others--joins in chorus with him—it clearly points to the fact that American patience with the General is on the verge of exhaustion.

General Musharraf’s deceptive balancing act has also added to the widening gulf between a skeptical Democratic Congress and Washington that has relied on his promises to do wonders since 9/11. Only recently Congress passed one of its first and most controversial pieces of legislation: a bill stipulating sanctions on military aid if Pakistan cannot control militants in its borders. In language unusual in its specificity and bluntness – and echoing the international community's concern – the legislation calls for President Bush to certify that "the Government of Pakistan is making all possible efforts to prevent the Taliban from operating in areas under its sovereign control, including in the cities of Quetta and Chaman and in the North West Frontier Province and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas."

There are seemingly no indications that Bush administration has learnt any lesson. It would oppose the bill before it becomes law, and has reiterated its satisfaction with Islamabad's efforts although “this satisfaction” is becoming a target of increasing criticism in Washington. January's bill, officially called "Implementing the 9/11 Commission Recommendations Act of 2007" still has to pass the Senate. And President Bush has ultimate authority to waive the provision on sanctions. But the bill's critique is one of the strongest linking Pakistan to Afghanistan's growing violence.

US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi during her recent visit to Islamabad signaled in her meetings that a change in tone toward Pakistan – from quiet disagreement to blunt accusation – is sweeping the Democratic-led Congress. That is a clear manifestation of a growing rift over how the US should deal with one of its most trusted allies in the war on terror and that it was time to accord the due role to the democratic forces within Pakistan.

In the light of this obvious wind of change, notwithstanding increasing sectarian violence in Pakistan and recent cases of suicide bombings, Washington's Pakistan policy is being thoroughly x-rayed by the experts who challenge General’s capacity to deliver both internally and externally. According to latest figures violence in Islamabad's backyard has reached unprecedented heights. More than 140 suicide attacks occurred in Afghanistan in 2006, as compared with 27 in 2005. Experts believe that this increase in cross-border terrorism was due to Pakistan’s signing of peace treaty in Waziristan that provided the Taliban/Al-Qaeda a secured enclave to launch their attacks into Afghanistan.

According to experts, if enacted, the bill threatens to alter a relationship, which, although flagging on its rhetorical surface, has been well fortified by cash. Since 9/11, Pakistan has received $1.5 billion in direct security-related assistance, in addition to billions for counterterrorism efforts – about $66 million per month. All told, Pakistan received the lion's share of $6.65 billion appropriated to the Defense Department for coalition support payments to "Pakistan, Jordan, and other key cooperating nations" between 2002 and 2007, according to Congressional reports.

The much publicized peace treaty between Islamabad and pro-Taliban leaders in the district of North Waziristan, bordering Afghanistan stands exposed as a relief for the terrorists operating from the Pakistani side into Afghanistan. President Hamid Karzai continues to accuse Islamabad of harboring Taliban/Al-Qaeda terrorists and allowing them cross-border terrorism. As a matter of fact extremists have been violating the peace accord with utmost contempt and have increased their attacks on US and NATO forces. There are indications that President Bush previously ever indulgent of Pakistan's autocratic ruler is now getting wary of him and his promises. Senior Bush administration officials now acknowledge, General Musharraf's assurances were empty -- as they have been many times before.

Instead of ceasing to be an operative camp for the Taliban/Al-Qaeda terrorism, the post-peace accord Waziristan has been thoroughly Talibanized. They are spreading their writ and influence through adjacent border districts. According to Washington Post, “Cross-border attacks and the deaths of American soldiers that they cause are up significantly. Al-Qaeda is reliably reported to be operating training camps in North Waziristan with the help of scores of foreign militants who are schooling recruits in suicide bombing and the use of improvised explosive devices.”

According to yet another shocking report in the recent edition of Newsweek, the Taliban/Al-Qaeda are also preparing Western citizens who could carry out major terrorist attacks in Britain or the United States. Although so far nothing substantive has come out of the investigations, the recent arrest of nine suspect terrorists in Birmingham sounds much similar to apprehensions raised in the Newsweek report.
Those who have had an access into the Pakistan's border areas say that the territory has started looking a lot like eastern Afghanistan before Sept. 11, 2001. American media—alarmed by the worsening of the scenario--wants President Bush and Mr. Negroponte to do some soul searching and ask themselves if they are repeating history by tolerating the rapid deterioration in the situation while GPM continues to play with them his own game of deception—i.e.—running with the American hare and hunting with the Taliban/Al-Qaeda hounds.

Bush administration is being rightly advised to call a spade a spade and call off the General’s bluff. Since Washington has provided him credibility, strategic cover and unaccountable billions of dollars in military, economic aid since 2001 and sustained his undemocratic rule much to the annoyance of the democratic forces and people in Pakistan, the need of the hour for him was to put his act together instead of providing Taliban/Al-Qaeda Pakistani territory through a so-called peace accord that is almost surrender to the terrorists.

Ever since 9-11 the situation in our part of the world is worsening. Though a sort of functional democracy has been brought about in Afghanistan, the country remains strife torn and highly unstable. And with next door Pakistan continuing to play its game of deception, chances of any improvement are hinged out to change within Pakistan. While not underestimating the international community’s enormous efforts to help the country recover from its stone-age existence to modernity, the key players involved in the recovery operation continue to keep their eyes closed to tackling the problem that is at its very root -- Islamabad. In his statesmanlike observations late last year Lord Patten had succinctly summed it up: “Truth is, Afghanistan will never be stable unless Pakistan's military government is replaced with a democracy.”

Lord Patten sanguinely believes Pakistan's primary export to Afghanistan is instability. On the most basic level, attacks in Afghanistan, including suicide bombings, are often planned and prepared at Taliban training camps across the border. “Islamabad claims to be doing all it can to stop this infiltration. But President Pervez Musharraf's protests ring hollow when he has done so little to address the concerns raised by his Afghan counterpart Hamid Karzai, that Taliban leaders are operating out of sanctuaries in Pakistan.”

Lord Patten has also firmly nailed General Musharraf’s propaganda that he has done enough to fight militants. “One needs only to look at the military's close relations with religious radicals to understand how unreliable a partner it is in stabilizing Afghanistan. Militant Islamist groups that Mr. Musharraf banned under the international spotlight following 9/11 and the 7/7 London bombings still operate freely. Jihadi organizations have been allowed to dominate relief efforts in the aftermath of the October 2005 earthquake. The military has repeatedly rigged elections, including the 2002 polls, to benefit the religious parties over their moderate, democratic alternatives. In short, Pakistan is ruled by a military dictatorship in cahoots with violent Islamist extremists. The military has no interest in democracy at home, so why does the outside world expect it to help build democracy next door?

Lord Patten is the leading light among the various geo-political experts who believe that Afghanistan can only be stabilized by tackling Pakistan first. And that, according to him, would mean returning Pakistan to democratic rule. “After seven years under the military, this is not an easy task, but some institutions are still surviving -- just. The judiciary, for example, has been badly degraded under Mr. Musharraf and his army colleagues; but there is enough left to give hope for some kind of gradual resuscitation.”

The greatest harm that the General has done to Pakistan and its liberal polity is by closing doors of participation in politics on former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto and other secular forces. According to a survey by London Economist late last year,
while he had his way in breaking other parties, the PPP has remained “much harder for Genera Musharraf to co-opt” and it is PPP under Bhutto, that has become “a rallying–flag for all Pakistanis who object to the army’s political meddling.” In contrast, the Economist reminds, he fared badly when he went for a referendum which he had to rig to win. “It was so grossly rigged that he apologized on national television for the “excesses” of his supporters.

Other moderate political parties are also struggling to survive. They are down but not yet out, “they could recover relatively quickly if given a democratic chance. Pro-dictatorship voices regularly argue that those parties were highly corrupt and that it was their corruption that justified the 1999 coup that brought the General to power. But they refuse to condemn or even acknowledge the military's large-scale, institutionalized corruption.

Lord Patten is of the opinion that: “So much has been grabbed by the military that it will take years just to catalogue it. The military has acquired vast tracts of state-owned land at nominal rates; its leaders dominate businesses and industries, ranging from banking to cereal factories. Their control of the economy has grown so great it will present an enormous challenge to any future democratically elected government.”

There is a general consensus among experts that an elected civilian government, when it takes over in Pakistan, will also be moderate in character and far more inclined to tackle, in earnest, the scourge of Islamic radicalism. Even in the rigged 2002 election, the religious parties polled only 11% of the vote and Pakistan People’s Party got the highest number of votes. It is a considered view that a fully free and fair race will squeeze out radical forces that have thrived under military rule and which play havoc with Pakistan's weak neighbor to the northwest. In addition, unlike the military, which always thrives in a hostile environment, a civilian government will have a stronger interest in peace with India.

Besides, democratic governance would also bring a much-needed opportunity to overhaul the country's obsolete education system. As the state system has consistently failed young people for decades, madrassas have taken up the slack, with the most extreme religious schools helping to radicalize tens of thousands of Pakistanis -- and Afghans -- filling heads with intolerant visions of Islam, far from the mainstream of South Asian Muslim society. The country needs a properly funded, state-run, secular education system.

It has been rightly observed that bringing all this about is a gigantic task, but demilitarizing and deradicalizing Pakistan is truly the key to bringing about stability in Afghanistan and the wider region. Those who are working for stability in the region will only be spinning their wheels until they make return to democracy in Pakistan a top priority and apply maximum pressure on Islamabad to ensure the 2007 elections are actually free and fair, open to all including the two former prime ministers Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif by applying clearly defined benchmarks and insisting on competent international observers. As long as Pakistani military calls the shots, Islamabad will remain hostage to terrorists and Afghanistan will never be stable nor have peace.

Islamabad, 2 February 2007: Former Prime Minister and Chairperson Pakistan Peoples Party, Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto and her husband Senator Asif Ali Zardari have condoled the death of the father of noted journalist Shakil Sheikh.

Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto in a condolence message to Shakil Sheikh wrote, “The loss of a parent is a great tragedy. Our sympathies are with you at this difficult time. Please accept our heartfelt condolences and convey the same to other members of the bereaved family.”

She also prayed to Almighty Allah to grant eternal peace to the departed soul and courage and fortitude to the bereaved family to bear this irreparable loss with equanimity.

In a separate condolence letter to the journalist Azim Siddiqui over his wife’s death, she wrote to Azim Siddiqui, “Senator Asif Ali Zardari and I are deeply grieved to hear about the death of your wife after remaining in coma for two month following a traffic accident. Her death was yet another tragedy that you and your family have faced in the recent past. Please accept our heartfelt condolences on the death of your wife. May Allah rest their soul in eternal peace and give you and members of your family fortitude to bear this irreparable loss with equanimity.”

With things falling apart the generals may soon have to beg the politicians living abroad to return before the country becomes totally ungovernable. Six years of military rule have made Pakistan unstable and weakened the federation to a level reached only at the time of the separation of East Pakistan. The increasing gulf between the rich and the poor keeps the unrest simmering which finds expression in violent reactions like the one during protests against the publication of Holy Prophet’s sacrilegious pictures. Increasing poverty, unemployment and food inflation are turning more and more young people to crime and violence. On Monday, a third suicide attack within four days reminds one that under the present rulers the country is sliding towards the type of anarchy prevailing in Afghanistan, Iraq and the Middle East. What adds to one’s worries is that Pakistan stands isolated in the region and the world at large as never before. Corruption is so widespread that Transparency International has put us in the category of the 20 most corrupt nations at the bottom of a list of 163. Land mafias having connections with powerful figures in the government continue to thrive, as do gangs of criminals. Security agencies have been assigned to shadow government’s opponents rather than deal with anti-state elements and criminals. This has further led to the deterioration of law and order. General Musharraf’s attention remains focussed on measures aimed at strengthening his hold. The devolution plan, referendum, and a politically engineered system were all aimed at achieving the purpose. The initiatives led to consequences detrimental to national unity while they took toll of good governance. The devolution plan broke the time tested steel frame of bureaucracy, created administrative confusion and negatively impacted on the quality of governance. What is more it extended the center’s tentacles to the Union Councils, thus further alienating smaller provinces.

The ruling coalition hammered together by the security agencies and NAB comprises heterogeneous groups that have nothing in common except a desire to stick to power for whatever it takes. In return for political support to the President they have been allowed to indulge in corruption and misuse of authority.

During the last six years the President has paid full attention to the pursuit of the war on terror, a task assigned by the US. Aware that his utility for Washington is diminishing, he is looking for a new assignment. He is working hard to convince the West he can play a useful role in the Middle East. Aware of the incompetence of his supporters the President is also required to micromanage the affairs of the ruling alliance. This has led to his attention to be diverted from pressing national issues. Vital matters thus continue to be neglected. Seven years after the military takeover, the country faces a severe power crisis that threatens both industry and agriculture. Had the government made plans to improve the power sector soon after taking over, the country would not have to face this kind of situation. What has complicated the situation further is the military mindset of the regime, which has sought the solution of complex socio-political problems through the use of force alone. In the case of Fata, the tendency was strengthened by the American demand for quick fixes to put an end to militancy. Instead of eradicating extremism nurtured over two decades by the security agencies themselves through long-term measures emphasis continues to be put on urgent and lethal military action. The indiscriminate use of force in tribal areas has not only led to unnecessary bloodletting but is responsible for the ongoing suicide attacks. The same military mindset has led to the worsening of the law and order situation in Balochistan. Ignoring the lessons from Iraq where the mightiest and the richest power in human history is bogged down in fighting an unconventional war, Gen Musharraf retained the misconception that military action against ill-quipped tribesmen combined with the elimination of Nawab Akbar Bugti would bring the Baloch to their knees. Balochistan continues to burn months after the physical elimination of the Nawab. Protests and shut downs on the one hand and attacks on gas pipelines, government installations and security forces on the other continue to take place unabated.

A military run administration drawing strength from elements brought together by the security agencies is not in a position to either comprehend or resolve the dynamics of the highly dangerous situation where it has landed the country. The situation has in fact deteriorated so badly that no single political party would be in a position to retrieve it even if it was to acquire commanding majority in the elections. The least that the establishment needs to do is not to delay the return of the exiled politicians, ensure that the forthcoming elections are fair and free and power is handed over to the elected civilian set up. In case this does not happen, the country is going to face in the coming months a political crisis of unprecedented magnitude.
E-mail: azizuddin@nation.com.pk  

Pakistan’s opposition leader and former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto has made it clear that she will return to Pakistan in time for the 2007 elections and that her Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) would not accept any deal with the present government that allows General Pervez Musharraf to retain his military uniform. “The raison d’etre of the PPP is to end military rule, not to perpetuate it,” Ms Bhutto recently told this columnist.

Given the PPP’s long history of opposition to military rule and the sacrifices of Ms Bhutto and her family for the restoration of democracy, this categorical stance should surprise no one. Ms Bhutto’s return to Pakistan will likely lead to massive mobilization against military rule, much like her 1986 return from exile marked the beginning of the end for General Ziaul Haq’s entrenched military regime.

The rumours of an impending deal between the PPP and General Musharraf have been periodically spread by the Pakistani establishment and denied by the PPP. These rumours served the purpose of confusing and dividing the opposition, in addition to making Musharraf look invulnerable. The persistence of these rumours was partly a reflection of the establishment’s effective media manipulation and partly a manifestation of the willingness of some elite Pakistanis to believe the worst about the PPP and the Bhuttos.

Pakistan’s elite loves to hate the Bhutto family. Before Zulfikar Ali Bhutto founded the PPP in 1967, Pakistan’s politics were confined to the drawing rooms of Karachi and Lahore. Rawalpindi- Islamabad had not yet emerged as a major elite centre and populist politics of undivided Pakistan usually took place in the country’s eastern wing, now Bangladesh.

Mr. Bhutto brought the unwashed masses of present-day Pakistan into the political equation, a “sin” for which he has not been forgiven by the country’s oligarchy of senior military officers, civil servants, international bankers, industrialists, major landowners and multinational corporation executives. It is not hard to run into someone in a Lahore drawing room even now, forty years later, complaining after his fourth peg of Johnny Walker Black Label whiskey that “If it was not for Bhutto, the poor would have remained in their place. That man disturbed the order of things, gave a voice to these wretches.”

Mr. Bhutto, and for that matter the PPP and other members of his family, were not perfect and much can be (and is) said about their mistakes, especially while in power. But the fact remains that the real reason for the Pakistani establishment’s resentments towards the Bhuttos and the PPP has little to do with their real and perceived flaws.

Since General Ziaul Haq deposed Mr. Bhutto in a military coup in 1977, the establishment has recognized the Bhutto name and the PPP as the major challenge to the establishment’s dominance of Pakistan. After executing Mr. Bhutto in what is now universally recognized as a show trial, Ziaul Haq initiated a major campaign of demonization against the PPP and the Bhuttos. Ms Bhutto underwent imprisonment and exile while Ziaul Haq held sway but was swept into power as soon as the people were given an opportunity to exercise their franchise after the military dictator’s death in 1988.

Ziaul Haq’s successors continued the vilification of the Bhutto family and persisted with efforts to divide and break the PPP. Ms Bhutto’s two terms in office were cut short by establishment-orchestrated dismissals from power. She lost both her brothers to assassinations under mysterious circumstances that are still unresolved. One cannot ignore suspicions that these murders were most likely managed by Pakistan’s ubiquitous covert spy agencies.

Ms Bhutto’s husband, Asif Ali Zardari, has been a target of particular disparagement. He was first imprisoned from 1990 to 1993 on corruption charges, only to be released without being convicted in any of the 18 cases brought against him. The current Auditor General of Pakistan questioned, last July, the spending of Rs. 28 million in fees for special prosecutors hired to persecute Mr. Zardari as “wasteful.” Not learning any lessons from the failed prosecutions of 1990-93, Mr. Zardari was imprisoned again in 1996, only to be released eight-and-a-half years later on bail. None of the charges against him has yet been proven and Mr. Zardari is quite confident that his persecutors will end up with egg on their faces once again.

Since assuming power in 1999, the military regime has tried to use the prosecutions against Mr. Zardari as a bargaining tool to seek the PPP’s cooperation. As a moderate politician, Ms Bhutto has not been averse to the idea of dialogue. But having paid the high price in personal suffering, it is clear that she will not accept Musharraf’s uniform in return for the withdrawal of cases against herself and Mr. Zardari.

Ms Bhutto has now been out of office for a decade and as any prosecutor will tell you, if a criminal case has not been successfully prosecuted during this period it probably has no legs to stand on. Any power of blackmail Musharraf might have had through the cases against them has diminished over time, freeing Ms Bhutto and Mr. Zardari to revert the PPP to its anti-establishment moorings.

The Pakistani military leadership’s aversion to the PPP is similar to that of the oligarchies in Latin America to the leftist parties in their respective countries and to the consistent efforts by the Turkish military to keep any Islamic-oriented political party out of parliament and power. Ironically, in several Latin American nations the parties detested by the oligarchs have eventually come to power. Turkey’s generals have to deal with a moderate party rooted in Islam, this time with an absolute majority in parliament.

The politics of exclusion practiced by self-righteous and self-centered oligarchs eventually come to an end. Nations suffer less when the ruling oligarchies realize the long-term trends and voluntarily relinquish power.

The country’s people have generally not shared the folly of Pakistan’s establishment. Each of Pakistan’s military patriarchs has based his claim to power on grounds of US support and his own ability to provide good governance and the President is not different. But good governance is not merely about some good guys making the right decisions. It is also about allowing ordinary people the right to appoint and remove those that govern them.

Ms Bhutto and the PPP have suffered many blows and have still managed to survive. The PPP is the only major political party in Pakistan that has not turned to the establishment for sustenance. The various factions of the Pakistan Muslim League (PML) and the assortment of Islamist and ethnic parties have all allowed themselves to be managed and manipulated by the Pakistani oligarchy.

The establishment has consistently rebuffed the PPP’s efforts to transform itself into a party acceptable to the establishment. In attempting to emulate the Muslim League’s patronage based model, the party alienated the idealistic progressive intelligentsia.

Allegations of corruption and a somewhat loose party structure have also been grounds for criticism of the PPP. But the party was never given a chance by either General Ziaul Haq or his successors, who have consistently considered it as the party that might bring change in the military-dominated polity of Pakistan.

It seems that the people of Pakistan are willing to give Ms Bhutto and the PPP another chance because they have never been given the opportunity to vote out the party after voting it into office. For once, the Pakistani establishment should give the people of Pakistan a free choice in selecting their leaders. Ms Bhutto will leave Pakistan’s political scene only when the people vote her out in a manipulation-free election. Otherwise, the Pakistani elite can eat its heart out; she is coming back for one more showdown with coup-makers and behind-the-scenes political fixers.

Husain Haqqani is Director of Boston University's Center for International Relations, and Co-Chair of the Islam and Democracy Project at Hudson Institute, Washington D.C. He is author of the book 'Pakistan between Mosque and Military'.

Commentary: China's shot in the dark
By ARNAUD DE BORCHGRAVE,

WASHINGTON, February 2,  2007: China is making geopolitical hay while the sun isn't shining for America.

Chinese leaders have seen President Bush's approval ratings continue a downward slide all over the world, according to the BBC's latest universal survey. More important, previous public opinion polls showed China with a better image than America in friendly European countries -- with the notable exception of Poland. The rest of the world has watched the defection of some of President Bush's Congressional supporters. China's topsiders have heard from their close ally president Musharraf -- "a major non-NATO ally" -- he doesn't think the United States can avoid what the world will perceive as a defeat in Iraq. And perception trumps reality the world over.

The global newspaper Financial Times wrote, "As authority drains from Mr. Bush, so Washington is losing its capacity to determine outcomes elsewhere. Iran is the principal beneficiary."

A defector from Musharraf's camp has informed U.S. authorities the Pakistani leader's "agonizing reappraisal" about the future of Afghanistan stems from his perception the United States cannot pull a victory rabbit out of the Iraqi hat. Hence, his perception neither the United States nor NATO can muster what it takes to complete their mission in Afghanistan. Hence, in turn, Musharraf's decision to authorize his all-powerful Inter-Services Intelligence agency to assist Taliban "moderates" in their bid to reconquer power in Kabul. ISI greatly assisted the original victory of Taliban in 1996.

Assessing the American scene as conveyed by CNN, FOX, BBC and al-Jazeera, Chinese leaders can be forgiven if they have concluded the American Century -- the 20th -- may not be renewed in the 21st. While the American body politic has been almost totally immersed in and absorbed by Iraq and Afghanistan, China's Hu Jintao's upcoming trip to Africa is the third to the continent by a top Chinese leader in a year.

Last November, China demonstrated its growing global clout by inviting 48 African heads of state and government to a summit in Beijing where they were wined and dined in a style unmatched by their former French, British and Portuguese colonial masters. China has been buying up their production of raw materials years in advance. Pledges have been made to double aid to Africa, train 15,000 professionals and grant 4,000 scholarships.

Vertiginous double-digit yearly growth for the fourth consecutive year has put China on track to leapfrog Germany as the world's third-largest economy. Its foreign currency reserves are accumulating at the rate of $30 million per hour and recently topped the $1 trillion mark -- about 70 percent of that in U.S. paper. It is outspending Japan on technology R&D. China is preening with self-confidence.

As Ford posts a record $12.7 billion loss, China's "Chery" (which started with machines and engine technology purchased from Ford Europe for $25 million), in alliance with China's "Visionary Vehicles," is getting ready to invade the U.S. market with five different models in 2008, all designed by Pininfarina (known for Ferrari and Lamborghini designs). The Las Vegas Sands Casino, with 800 gaming tables, is now the world's largest -- not in Nevada but in Macau, China.

To offset America's enormous strategic military superiority, the Chinese military concluded in the 1990s information warfare -- or cyberwarfare -- could give China an "asymmetric" advantage over the United States. In 1998, the PLA newspaper Jiefangjun Bao said priority should be given "to learning how to launch an electronic attack on an enemy ... to ensure electromagnetic control in an area and at a time favorable to us."

How to take down the computer-driven sinews of a modern industrialized state quickly became a top priority for the major powers and Israel. Since then the United States has more than matched China's arsenal of cyberweapons -- from ultra sophisticated logic bombs, to Trojan horses, worms, viruses and denial of service decoys.

The 1990-91 Desert Shield and Desert Storm and the 2003 invasion of Iraq (when 50 military-specific satellites and numerous commercial birds were used) showed the Chinese how utterly dependent the United States had become on "satcoms." In 1998, the failure of a single satellite disabled 80 percent of the pagers in the United States.

Unmanned aircraft like the Predator achieve pinpoint bombing accuracy over the Pak-Afghan border while flown by a pilot/bombardier in a simulated cockpit thousands of miles away in Washington. Signals from Global Positioning System's satellites guide precision weapons to their targets in the same role played by a rifle's gunsight.

Modern battlespace's eyes and ears are in orbit and vulnerable. The space equivalents of bullets and shells -- kinetic energy weapons -- to destroy or damage a target in space is the next phase of modern warfare. The 2001 Congress-mandated Commission to Assess U.S. National Security Space Management said the United States "is an attractive candidate for a space Pearl Harbor -- or a surprise attack on U.S. space assets aimed at crippling U.S. war-fighting and other capabilities."

Chinese strategists view U.S. dependence on space as an asymmetric vulnerability while Chinese scientists are known to be working on ASAT (anti-satellite weapons, such as kinetic kill vehicles). Last week, China decided the time had come to demonstrate the fragility of the U.S. military dependency on communications satellites.

Without warning, Jan. 11, China fired a missile aimed at one of its own aging communications satellites. With pinpoint accuracy, the missile pulverized the Feng Yun 1-C 500 miles above earth, scattering thousands of tiny fragments that could easily puncture the metal skin of other satellites in orbit. The former Soviet Union did it first in 1971, followed by the United States in 1985, before Congress banned further tests lest they imperiled one of the several hundred satellites, many from other nations.

Space as a sanctuary free from armed conflict will most probably come to an end over the next 20 years. Speaking in flawless English at the World Economic Forum in Davos last week, one-star general Yao Yunzhu, who directs China's Asia-Pacific Office at the Academy of Military Science in Beijing, predicted: "Outer space is going to be weaponized in our lifetime." She is 52. If there's going to be "a space superpower," she said, "it will have company" -- China.

China also has -- untested -- the ultimate weapon to silence an enemy: the E-bomb, or electromagnetic pulse. In the nosecone of an ICBM, or even MRBM, set to explode at an altitude of 75 miles above the east coast of the United States, EMPs can knock out all communications (except small handheld radios) from Maine to Florida and from Manhattan to the Mississippi River.

Anti-satellite artillery and the EMP threat would be powerful equalizers if it ever came to Sino-American hostilities over Taiwan. Following disengagement from Iraq, U.S. defense priorities are likely to remain focused on combating terrorism while Europe's defense agenda will become increasingly unsupportive of U.S. policies. China is eyeing an emerging geopolitical vacuum with interest. And it has no intention to play the game of nations by U.S. rules.

Islamabad February 1, 2007: Senator Farooq Naek Counsel of Senator Asif Ali Zardari has issued the following statement today.

Senator Asif Ali Zardari challenged the jurisdiction of the English courts to hear matters in relation to alleged corruption charges in Pakistan, since it would be duplication and a waste of costs for the same issues to be aired in London and in Pakistan.

The Court in London today decided that it has jurisdiction to hear the case in London even if a case of similar nature is pending in Pakistan.

The case will therefore be defended in London by Mr. Zardari in the same way it was defended and won in the Isle of Man court last year.

The Judgment in the Isle of Man courts concerned facts almost identical to the issues in London. Mr. Zardari’s position is that the eventual conclusion will be the same.

It is important to realize that the proceedings in Court today did not concern the merits of the case, but simply as to whether the English courts had jurisdiction to hear matters in relation to charges of alleged corruption.

Mr. Zardari will defend all cases wherever the Government of Pakistan will file against him on concocted charges to settle political scores and politically victimize him. He is certain that the English courts will arrive at the same conclusion as the courts in the Isle of Man,

It may be recalled that the allegations of corruption were raised against Mr. Zardari in 1998 and till date not a single case on merit has been decided against him in any jurisdiction.

On the other hand, he has been acquitted in two cases of alleged corruption and in one them, the Supreme Court, while setting aside the Judgment of the NAB court, held that there was Government interference and the judges of NAB court were biased against him.

Mr Zardari has also been acquitted in more than six other cases falsely filed against him.

Islamabad, February 1, 2007: Former Prime Minister and Chairperson Pakistan Peoples Party Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto has issued following message on Yom-i-Ashur, the day of martyrdom of Hazrat Imam Hussain, falling on the 10th of Moharram, corresponding to Tuesday January 30, 2007.

"Hazrat Imam Hussain (May Allah be pleased with him) sacrificed his own life and the lives of his dearest family members and faithful followers on this day for the cause of truth and justice and to resist oppression and tyranny. This supreme sacrifice offered by the Imam teaches us that tyranny, oppression and falsehood must be resisted no matter how heavy are the odds.

"As we pay homage to the great martyrs of Karbala and reflect on the lessons of their supreme sacrifice today, we must also look inwardly and do some soul searching. Today the need for learning a lesson from the martyrdom of Hazrat Imam Hussain (May Allah be pleased with him) is even greater because tyranny and oppression continue to stark the land in different forms and different manifestations.

"On this day therefore we reiterate our resolve that no matter what the odds we shall neither submit before tyranny and injustice nor let evil have its sway.

"On this day I also urge my countrymen to rise above sectarianism, forge unity among their ranks and dissociate themselves from all those elements who driven by frenzy are fanning sectarianism and anarchy. The need for harmony and tolerance has never been as great as it is today.

“I also urge the countrymen to challenge and drive out those who behind the façade of seeking to curb extremism and terrorism are only conspiring to perpetuate their illegal hold on power".

Islamabad January 28, 2007: Pakistan Peoples Party has demanded that the Parliament be taken into confidence about the agreements allowing the use of country’s air bases by foreign troops in the war on terror, the revenues received thus far from leasing air bases and how the revenue had been utilized.

The Public Accounts Committee of the National Assembly asked for this information the other day but the Defense Ministry declined saying it was ‘not in the purview of the Committee’. Earlier the Defense Ministry had refused to answer questions about real estate developers using the name of the armed forces.

“The self serving refusal to trust the PAC is not only a mockery of the Parliament, smacks of arrogance and raises serious questions of transparency but also gravely undermines the public image of defense forces”, said spokesperson of the Party in a statement today.

It is preposterous to claim that the PAC was not competent to ask questions that revolved around financial propriety, he said.

If the Public Accounts Committee of the Parliament cannot ask questions about revenues generated from leasing the air bases and building housing societies in the name of defense services then who can, he asked?

The spokesperson said that under Article 78 of the Constitution, ‘All revenues received by the Federal Government shall form part of Federal Consolidate Fund’ and all payments and withdrawals from it are to be regulated by an Act of the Parliament.

Telling the Public Accounts Committee to shut up smacks of a smoking gun, he said. “Tongues can be silenced temporarily by use of brute force but doubts and misgivings once sown in the minds refuse to vanish”.

He said that it is not for the first time that Parliamentary questions about revenue generation and utilization relating to the defence services had raised serious misgivings.

In reply to a question # 35 asked in the Senate in December 2003 it transpired that the income derived from the Lahore Fortress Stadium was also not being credited to the Federal Consolidated Fund as the defence ministry itself claimed that it was utilized for the construction of houses and maintenance of vehicles, he said.

“If the armed forces have to remain in public consciousness as defenders of the land and not anything else the defense ministry must come out clean and not skirt the issues”.

ISLAMABAD: The Pakistan People's Party Parliamentarians is producing a detailed report on the mysterious disappearances of citizens and international laws that make individuals committing the crime of detaining citizens liable to be produced before international tribunals even long after the commission of the crime.

Speaking at a seminar on elections and democracy here on Saturday, former senator Farhatullah Babar said that the compendium is being produced by the People's Institute of Democracy, a subsidiary of the recently-launched NGO called Shaheed Bhutto Foundation (SBF).

PPP Chairperson Benazir Bhutto is the patron-in-chief of the Foundation and former interior minister Major-General Naseerullah Babar is the chairman of the its board of governors. Senator Farhatullah Babar is coordinator of the Peoples Institute of Democracy that has six other human rights activists, intellectuals and academics as members.

Under the international law forced disappearances of citizens is crime against humanity and individuals committing such a crime could also be tried at any time in future, he said, adding that the state agencies must take heed of the fact that the relatives of victims and human rights bodies could, in future, seek recourse to justice under this law.

He said that the provision in the international law was a powerful tool in the hands of victims and citizens to end mysterious disappearances by warning the perpetrators that they can be held accountable for kidnappings.

Another most disturbing aspect of the deteriorating human rights and erosion of democracy is the absence of parliamentary control and oversight over the security apparatus and the state's intelligence agencies.

The Peoples Institute of Democracy also plans to undertake a study on this critical issue and to suggest ways and means for bringing the security apparatus under the ambit of parliamentary scrutiny, he said.

'Mother of all elections' will be certainly rigged, cautions Babar

Peshawar, Feb 2 2007: Pakistan's former interior minister and PPP leader Naseerullah Babar has said that the motive behind Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf declaring the next general elections as "mother of all elections" was to "rig the polls to bring his 'blue-eyed' boys back to power".

He said that the nation was well aware of the fact that all the previous elections were also rigged to sideline popular political forces and install a non-political entity instead.

Babar was addressing a news conference organised by the Bhutto Shaheed Foundation (BSF) here yesterday.

He said that majority of PPP leaders were willing to take part in the elections in 1985 as per the wish of the founding party chairman Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, but they were put behind bars. He said Bhutto had advised them not to abandon political platform otherwise "undeserving" elements would rise to replace them. "And, on the basis of the said statement of ZA Bhutto, we will never boycott the next elections despite the fears of massive rigging," he said.

Babar, who is also chairman of the BSF board of governors, said the Foundation would launch a book titled "How Elections Are Rigged in Pakistan" at the inaugural session of BSF in Islamabad tomorrow (Saturday). He said that the book was compiled by the People Institute of Democracy of BSF under the chairmanship of Farhatullah Baber and is an attempt to unearth the unethical mechanisms employed by the previous administrations to rig the elections and tamper with poll results to get the people elected who did not represent masses.

"The book is a research work based on pre-poll rigging, post-poll rigging and rigging during the elections," he said. (ANI)

PPP-P warns govt against bloody revolution in the event of polls rigging

Sunday February 04, 2007: ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Peoples Party Parliamentarians (PPP-P) has warned the government that any attempt by the rulers to rig the polls will trigger bloody revolution in the country.
This was warned by PPP-P leadership while addressing a seminar held here under Shaheed Bhutto Foundation entitled election rigging in Pakistan.

Opposition leader in senate Raza Rabbani said it was not correct to think about holding of fair elections in the presence of international observers. These observers are supportive of the present military government. It is not correct to rely on them. They will say like before that 15 to 20 percent rigging takes place. Pre polls rigging will move forward as general Musharraf will get him re-elected.

Voicing concern over electoral lists, he said these lists are defective as majority of voters have been deprived of the right to vote through these lists. The electoral lists are not being prepared in PPP-P dominated constituencies. We have provided list to the election commissioner but he seems to be helpless, he alleged.

The passage to Islamabad passes through Mochi gate, Qissa Khawani bazaar and Quetta rather than Washington, he noted. " I give warning to the rulers that it is not 2002. If any rigging is carried out then bloody revolution can rage into the country.

Naseer Ullah Babar said people like Sher Afgan and Sharif ud Din Pirzada are showing wrong doorway to general Pervez Musharraf to the corridors of power. General Musharraf is launching election campaign of a political party, he reiterated.

PPP-P information secretary Sherry Rehman said every political party has right to participate in the electoral process.

Jahangir Badar alleged generals in power devised new methods of polls rigging in the country.

Syeda Abida Hussain urged her party to convene national conference with reference to polls rigging.

Aitzaz Ahsan said the polls rigging is only aimed at depriving the people of power who deserve for it. The power in fact rests with GHQ, Aiwan-e-Sadr and bureaucracy. Shaukat Aziz does not look to be prime minister. The prime minister has been relegated to a cartoon which keeps on sitting in the feet of the president. This thing is acceptable only to Jamali, Shujaat and Shaukat Aziz and not to Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto, he observed.

PPP leaders warn of ‘Orange Revolution’ if polls rigged
By Zulfiqar Ghuman

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) leaders on Saturday warned President Gen Pervez Musharraf to hold free and fair general elections, otherwise there would be an ‘Orange Revolution’ in Pakistan akin to the people’s movement against poll rigging in Ukraine in 2004.

They were speaking at a seminar titled ‘Democracy and Elections’, organised here at a local hotel by the Shaheed Bhutto Foundation (SBF) of the party, to launch the booklet ‘How Elections Are Rigged in Pakistan’. The booklet elaborates on how state machinery and resources have been used for pre-poll, poll and post-poll rigging.

IA Rehman, chairman of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP), who was chief guest at the seminar, said political parties should not wait for the elections and advised them to launch their struggle now because there could be no free and fair polls under Gen Musharraf.

“The government, in my opinion, has already completed half of its homework for the general elections and will complete the remaining half before the day of the election. No drama can be called elections in a country where corruption is legalised, judiciary is under control and there is no law or constitution in place,” he said.

He added that keeping political leaders in exile out of the race was also rigging.

Ch Aitzaz Ahsan, member of Central Executive Committee (CEC) and senior MNA of the party, said that the establishment had always rigged elections. “In Pakistan, power has always remained in GHQ and President’s House with dummy and powerless prime ministers playing to their tunes,” he said.

Ahsan said that the current regime had not only rigged the elections but also rigged the constitution with the 17th Amendment in connivance with mullahs. He warned that if the PPP and their allies were stopped in the elections through unfair means, there would be an ‘Orange Revolution’ and nobody would be able to stop them. “We will contest the elections for the empowerment of the people rather than getting the government,” he said.

Mian Raza Rabbani, deputy secretary-general of the party, accused the regime of depriving people of their vote by ignoring them in the voters lists, especially in areas where the PPP had strong support. “There are reports that about 2.5 million people have been disenfranchised in the new voters list,” he said.

Sherry Rehman, PPP information secretary, said that boycotting the elections was an option but they were in favour of change by a free and fair vote.

Farhatullah Babar, official spokesman of Benazir Bhutto, said the party was compiling a compendium of missing people and those who kidnapped them.

Mir Lashkari Raisani, Maj Gen (r) Naseerullah Babar, Jahangir Badr and Syeda Abida Hussain also spoke on the occasion.

WASHINGTON February 1, 2007: Former prime minister Benazir Bhutto and her husband Asif Zardari will attend the White House prayer breakfast together here today to dispel media reports that they had separated, Pakistan People's Party (PPP) officials have said.

Bhutto arrived in New York over the weekend to attend the annual event, which includes a two-day conference at the Washington Hilton.

"It is totally baseless," said former PPP senator Khawja Akbar while commenting on the report. "Of course, she is staying with Zardari in New York and they will attend the prayer breakfast together."

The prayers, although called the White House prayer breakfast, are also held at the hotel where president Ronald Reagan was shot and wounded on March 30, 1981, as he came out after addressing a gathering.

Since the US Congress hosts the conference, a large number of lawmakers from both Republican and Democratic parties attend the entire proceedings.

This year's conference is particularly important because of a change in Congress which passed from Republican to Democrats' control in November's mid-term elections.
"We hope that this change will also help the cause of democracy in Pakistan," Akbar said and noted that the new Congress had already taken up the issue of democracy in Pakistan in a resolution it adopted earlier this month.

"The new Congress has shown that it is not focused on the war on terrorism alone. For them, insurgency and democracy are both major concerns," he said.

The senator said that Bhutto would spend six days in Washington, meeting US lawmakers, government officials, members of the academia and media.

Prominent politicians, religious leaders, government officials and scholars come from all over the world to attend the prayer breakfast, which President Bush is scheduled to address as well.

Bush, Benazir meet today

LAHORE February 01, 2007: US President George W Bush and Pakistan’s former prime minister Benazir Bhutto are expected to meet today (Thursday) at the National Prayers Breakfast in Washington, Geo television reported.

According to the channel, Bhutto will be accompanied by her husband Asif Ali Zardari and two senior leaders of the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP). US congressmen and think tank members will also attend the breakfast, among other renowned personalities from around the world, the channel said. daily times monitor

Courtesy DailyTimes.

Bhutto likely to attend open meeting

ISLAMABAD February 1, 2007: Backdoor contacts between Benazir Bhutto’s Pakistan Peoples Party and Nawaz Sharif’s Pakistan Muslim League-N on the issue of timing of the opposition All Parties Conference (APC) seem to be moving in the right direction, official sources said here yesterday.

The sources said that there are now positive indications from PPP that a final reply about Bhutto’s participation in the APC would be communicated within the current month.

According to sources in Alliance for Restoration of Democracy, the PPP has dropped a positive hint that Bhutto may be participating in the APC.

Words of Shaheed