Focus on Pakistan army as Musharraf faces the boot

[batmannow]

Focus on Pakistan army as Musharraf faces the boot

By Simon Cameron-Moore
Reuters
Friday, August 8, 2008; 9:24 AM

ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - Eyes were on Pakistan's generals on Friday for any gesture of support for President Pervez Musharraf a day after a four-month-old civilian coalition declared plans to impeach the former army chief.
The ex-commando, who seized power in a coup nine years ago, has yet to make any public response after being given the option of facing a confidence vote in parliament or being impeached.
A session of the National Assembly, Pakistan's lower house of parliament, has been called for Monday, coincidentally Musharraf's 65th birthday, to start what could be a lengthy process unless the president decides to bow out without a fight.

The prospects of the nuclear-armed Muslim country that is also a hiding place for al Qaeda leaders lurching into a fresh bout of instability will be viewed with trepidation by the United States and other Western nations, and regional neighbors.

A two-day meeting of the army's top brass at headquarters in Rawalpindi, the city next door to Islamabad, ended on Friday with a statement mainly about promotions which made no mention of the political crisis.
The focus is now on the man to whom Musharraf passed command of the army when he retired from the military last November.
"The fate of Musharraf now lies in the hands of Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Kayani," said analyst Lisa Curtis in a commentary for the Washington-based Heritage Foundation.
Although Kayani had been Musharraf's intelligence chief, civilian politicians have been encouraged by his efforts to withdraw the army from political affairs.
Musharraf has said in the past he would resign rather than be dragged through an impeachment process by a parliament filled with enemies.
He has also said he will not use powers to dissolve parliament, but critics say the unpredictable president suffers from a "savior complex," and he could do just that in order to remove rivals he believes are making a mess of running Pakistan.
To do it he will need the army's backing, something which analysts have described as a "worst-case scenario."
Curtis said the United States should avoid interfering, other than to urge all sides to seek a peaceful resolution to the crisis to prevent a return to military rule.

ALL-TIME LOWS

While the army had accepted a switch to civilian rule which began with the defeat of pro-Musharraf parties in an election on February 18, it was supposed to be a transition, and the generals could react badly to any humiliation of their former chief.
Speaking to news channels on Friday, a leading member of the coalition, Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan expressed optimism that Kayani would not let the army "meddle in politics."
Despite the uncertainty, investors in a share market that has lost 38 percent after peaking on April 21, recovered some nerve on Friday as the main index rose 2 percent. The rupee at 72.60/70 to the dollar was a brushing all-time lows struck a month ago.
Politicians and analysts believe the generals will want to watch how the situation unfolds.
"They will have their concerns, but having concerns is one thing and sending in the tanks is quite another," said Ayaz Amir, an anti-Musharraf politician in the National Assembly, and a former army major.
Pakistan has yo-yoed between civilian and military rule throughout its turbulent history, but the army's image took a battering during the Musharraf era, particularly over its role supporting an unpopular U.S.-led war on terrorism.
The civilians, this time, took over an economy facing possible meltdown, with people suffering spiraling food and fuel prices, and Islamist militancy spreading across the northwest.
Musharraf was blamed for Pakistan's multiple crises by Asif Ali Zardari, the widower of slain two-time prime minister Benazir Bhutto and head of the coalition, and Nawaz Sharif, the premier Musharraf overthrew, as they announced plans on Thursday to impeach him.

Sharif's party said on Friday some ministers would rejoin the cabinet, having pulled out last May after Zardari backtracked on a commitment to reinstate Supreme Court judges Musharraf had dismissed during emergency rule late last year.
It said the rest would rejoin once the judges are restored.
(Additional reporting by Augustine Anthony and Zeeshan Haider

 

[araz]

Focus on Pakistan army as Musharraf faces the boot

By Simon Cameron-Moore
Reuters
Friday, August 8, 2008; 9:24 AM

(Additional reporting by Augustine Anthony and Zeeshan Haider

I think Kiyani is unlikelyto intervene. He was the only one who sat quiet when talk of showing the door to the Ex CJ was on going. One of the first things that he did was to withdraw all officers involved in civilion roles. Although there is a tradition of supporting theEx-chief, things have gone too far. Army at the current point in time is not able to take over the reigns of the Government. Even if Article 58 2 B is invoked, what will Musharaf do next . He will have to hold elections within 90 days to prove to the world that he is a democrat at heart. What happens then? and how does he handle the new parlianment. The rationale does not work.
He cannot take over power now as there would be too much upheavel internationaly and he cant afford the repurcussions.
So his only hope is to either fight it out in the parlianmant or look for a safe exit. He is likely to fight it out. Whether he has got any aces up his sleeve is what we dont know.I guess the picture will become clearer in the next couple of days.
Araz

 

[batmannow]

I think Kiyani is unlikelyto intervene. He was the only one who sat quiet when talk of showing the door to the Ex CJ was on going. One of the first things that he did was to withdraw all officers involved in civilion roles. Although there is a tradition of supporting theEx-chief, things have gone too far. Army at the current point in time is not able to take over the reigns of the Government. Even if Article 58 2 B is invoked, what will Musharaf do next . He will have to hold elections within 90 days to prove to the world that he is a democrat at heart. What happens then? and how does he handle the new parlianment. The rationale does not work.
So his only hope is to either fight it out in the parlianmant or look for a safe exit. He is likely to fight it out. Whether he has got any aces up his sleeve is what we dont know.I guess the picture will become clearer in the next couple of days.
Araz

Dear, sir ARAZ.. just want to remind you , just only one thing which you forget sir, PRESIDENT OF PAKISTAN is the supreme commander of the ARAMED FORCES OF PAKISTAN???

He cannot take over power now as there would be too much upheavel internationaly and he cant afford the repurcussions.

Dear sir ARAZ, only one thing proved again and again.... all around the world. time and time, MIGHT IS RIGHT, if he can show the might he has every right to do anything?

 

[araz]

Dear, sir ARAZ.. just want to remind you , just only one thing which you forget sir, PRESIDENT OF PAKISTAN is the supreme commander of the ARAMED FORCES OF PAKISTAN???



He cannot take over power now as there would be too much upheavel internationaly and he cant afford the repurcussions.


Dear sir ARAZ, only one thing proved again and again.... all around the world. time and time, MIGHT IS RIGHT, if he can show the might he has every right to do anything?

Batman Now.
Lets then see who is proven right. I think in the history of nations ther comes certain cornerstones. Pakistan needs to turn this one and progress now. MUsharraf is not indispensable. He may have done good deeds , but his time may have come.
Lets see how events transpire. Please note I have no faith in the morons who are trying to impeach him either.
Araz

 

[JK!]

Dear sir ARAZ, only one thing proved again and again.... all around the world. time and time, MIGHT IS RIGHT, if he can show the might he has every right to do anything?

Dissolving Parliament will make him lose credability both domestically and abroad even if Musharraf has the support of the army. Its not worth it.

If elections are held within 90 days this civilian dictatorship duo of Sharif and Zardari may strengthen and further consolidate their positions.

 

[batmannow]

Dissolving Parliament will make him lose credability both domestically and abroad even if Musharraf has the support of the army. Its not worth it.

If elections are held within 90 days this civilian dictatorship duo of Sharif and Zardari may strengthen and further consolidate their positions.

1. ITs basicly, a trap by PPP ! i guss , durring the vist of USA! ASIF ZARDARI had presented a comprehensive plan to CIA. which can counter PAKARAMY forever & give USA+INDIAN allaince to move further inside pakistan?
2. To, give up all nukes, and its facilities accept, all the points which GREAT GAME has to offer?

3.Give more basses to USAs armed forces, accept INDIAN dominence compeltly and forever?

4. TO get a frim grip, on superpower CHINA, which US fear most?

5. TO, sround IRAN & CERTNLY INVADE IRAN?

I, guss these are the objectives which USAs is trying to get , scince the early days of invading IRAQ+AFGHANISTAN. I mean more, and more capture of muslim lands, thier resourses, thier culture & importantly changing of ISLAMIC VALUES AND its civillization.
To, stop all that, AXIS OF EVIL crap!!! anything, everything can be acceptable from MUSHARAF. no more interfernce by any one should be accepted to save PAKISTAN???

All that, i had written... is all my, fear which every senseable pakistani is feeling now, does we have to struggle against one more BRITISH EAST INDIA CO, again????..

 

[blain2]

I think Kiyani is unlikelyto intervene. He was the only one who sat quiet when talk of showing the door to the Ex CJ was on going. One of the first things that he did was to withdraw all officers involved in civilion roles. Although there is a tradition of supporting theEx-chief, things have gone too far. Army at the current point in time is not able to take over the reigns of the Government. Even if Article 58 2 B is invoked, what will Musharaf do next . He will have to hold elections within 90 days to prove to the world that he is a democrat at heart. What happens then? and how does he handle the new parlianment. The rationale does not work.
He cannot take over power now as there would be too much upheavel internationaly and he cant afford the repurcussions.
So his only hope is to either fight it out in the parlianmant or look for a safe exit. He is likely to fight it out. Whether he has got any aces up his sleeve is what we dont know.I guess the picture will become clearer in the next couple of days.
Araz

I think the one thing he should do is try to undo NRO. That would be one way to get Zardari off the streets. After that he should resign and tell that useless idiot Nawaz Sharif to go nuts with the country. After all Pakistan is destined to stay in the hands of these fuedals and industrialists. Sounds defeatist but also reality. The sooner we all realize this, the better off we are. Many of Musharraf's failures are due to the fact that he had to accommodate these same people in his government. So even after he goes, the same people will perpetuate.

This is the sad reality of Pakistan. All those talking about rule of law and democracy will realize the same in the post-Musharraf era. Those talking about supremacy of justice will realize that like Musharraf, Iftikhar Chaudhry is also a person. Who will try to do his part but his efforts will go by the wayside. In all honesty, with a PPP government in place, do not expect CJP Iftikhar Chaudhry to be able to do much at all...Zardari has a gripe with the CJP as well so nothing but more instability awaits us.

There is absolutely no interference (aside from the Presidency blocking non-merit based political appointments in key posts) from the Presidency yet these morons in the government have not been able to fix (forget fix, they have not been able to even enunciate a policy that would get around to fixing the problems being faced by the country) anything. So all this talk of getting rid of the President to get on with things is as much of BS as was the promise of "roti, kapra, makaan".

 

[araz]

I think the one thing he should do is try to undo NRO. That would be one way to get Zardari off the streets. After that he should resign and tell that useless idiot Nawaz Sharif to go nuts with the country. After all Pakistan is destined to stay in the hands of these fuedals and industrialists. Sounds defeatist but also reality. The sooner we all realize this, the better off we are. Many of Musharraf's failures are due to the fact that he had to accommodate these same people in his government. So even after he goes, the same people will perpetuate.

This is the sad reality of Pakistan. All those talking about rule of law and democracy will realize the same in the post-Musharraf era. Those talking about supremacy of justice will realize that like Musharraf, Iftikhar Chaudhry is also a person. Who will try to do his part but his efforts will go by the wayside. In all honesty, with a PPP government in place, do not expect CJP Iftikhar Chaudhry to be able to do much at all...Zardari has a gripe with the CJP as well so nothing but more instability awaits us.

There is absolutely no interference (aside from the Presidency blocking non-merit based political appointments in key posts) from the Presidency yet these morons in the government have not been able to fix (forget fix, they have not been able to even enunciate a policy that would get around to fixing the problems being faced by the country) anything. So all this talk of getting rid of the President to get on with things is as much of BS as was the promise of "roti, kapra, makaan".

My only problem with it is a legal one. Even if he repeals the NRO all the cases have already been withdrawn. Who will resurrect these and what would be the legal position. Talking to my contact in Judiciary, Iftikhar chaudhry is a loose canon from PPP s point of view. He is arrogant and atleast not financially corrupt. He has taken personal interest in the case of the missing peopel. He is also likelyto open the debate about the legalityof NRO and will not back out on this issue. Doggar on the other hand has baggage associated with him and therefore is open to compromise.
The other problem which can become a nuisance for all of these morons is that if SC scents independence, they wil cause problems for all to come. I think this is what is causing more worries for every body. Obviouslythis would be good for the people, but who cares about those cretins.
WaSalam
Araz

 

[araz]

1. ITs basicly, a trap by PPP ! i guss , durring the vist of USA! ASIF ZARDARI had presented a comprehensive plan to CIA. which can counter PAKARAMY forever & give USA+INDIAN allaince to move further inside pakistan?
2. To, give up all nukes, and its facilities accept, all the points which GREAT GAME has to offer?

3.Give more basses to USAs armed forces, accept INDIAN dominence compeltly and forever?

4. TO get a frim grip, on superpower CHINA, which US fear most?

5. TO, sround IRAN & CERTNLY INVADE IRAN?

I, guss these are the objectives which USAs is trying to get , scince the early days of invading IRAQ+AFGHANISTAN. I mean more, and more capture of muslim lands, thier resourses, thier culture & importantly changing of ISLAMIC VALUES AND its civillization.
To, stop all that, AXIS OF EVIL crap!!! anything, everything can be acceptable from MUSHARAF. no more interfernce by any one should be accepted to save PAKISTAN???

All that, i had written... is all my, fear which every senseable pakistani is feeling now, does we have to struggle against one more BRITISH EAST INDIA CO, again????.. [/I][/B]

I think if he has done this he will be disppensed in the nearest bin preferably in unidentifiable little pieces.i dont think PA will sit by and let him hand us over on a silver platter.
Araz

 

[batmannow]

US May Step Up Forays into Pakistan

August 08, 2008
Associated Press

WASHINGTON - Top Bush administration officials are urging the president to direct U.S. troops in Afghanistan to be more aggressive in pursuing militants into Pakistan on foot as part of a proposed radical shift in its regional counterterrorism strategy, The Associated Press has learned.

Senior intelligence and military aides want President Bush to give American soldiers greater flexibility to operate against al-Qaida and Taliban fighters who cross the border from Pakistan's lawless tribal border area to conduct attacks inside Afghanistan, officials say.

The plan could include sending U.S. special forces teams, temporarily assigned to the CIA, into the tribal areas to hit high-value targets, according to an intelligence official with direct knowledge of the plan.

Such a move would be controversial, in part because of Pakistani opposition to U.S. incursions into its territory, and the proposal is not universally supported in Washington. It comes amid growing political instability in Pakistan and concerns that elements of Pakistan's security forces are collaborating with extremists.

Senior members of Bush's national security team met last week at the White House to discuss the recommendations and are now weighing how to proceed, the officials said.

The top agenda item at the meeting of the so-called deputies committee - usually the No. 2 officials at the departments of Defense, and State, plus the intelligence agencies and the National Security Council - was to "review and potentially revise cross-border strategy," a person familiar with the session told the AP.

"What the deputies committee has raised is, given the possibility that political fragmentation in Pakistan is going to continue, do we need to change our strategy?" the official said. He and other current and former officials spoke on condition of anonymity because sensitive foreign policy matters are in play.

The deputies committee is two levels down from the president, so its recommendations would not immediately affect policy.

White House spokesman Tony Fratto declined to comment.
The current strategy - relying on Pakistan to keep a lid on the tribal areas along the border with Afghanistan - was meant to support Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, a strong ally of the U.S. who took control of Pakistan in 1999 in a bloodless coup. Musharraf was sidelined this spring when a coalition government trounced Musharraf's allies in parliamentary elections. He remains president but with vastly diminished influence.
Pakistan's governing coalition announced Thursday it will seek to impeach Musharraf, cranking up pressure on the U.S.-backed former general to resign.

In Washington, the State Department and some Pentagon officials are leery of the new proposal, warning of repercussions from the Pakistani government, which they fear could be further destabilized, while some officials in the CIA are pushing the plan.

Officials closer to the front lines in Afghanistan also are pushing for a newly aggressive stance. The rules currently limiting U.S. incursions into Pakistan when in hot pursuit of enemy fighters or targets would not be stretched under the plan. But U.S. forces would be encouraged to use that authority liberally.
The Associated Press reported last year that U.S. rules of engagement allowed ground forces to go a little over 6 miles into Pakistan when in hot pursuit, and when forces were targeted or fired on by the enemy. U.S. rules allow aircraft to go 10 miles into Pakistan air space.
Afghanistan's ambassador to the U.S. supports the plan.
"The argument that we may destabilize Pakistan has taken us to where we are right now," Ambassador Said T. Jawad told the AP. "Pursuing the policy of public praise and private pressure on Pakistan doesn't work."


But defense officials say they are cautioning against stepping up military operations in Pakistan without specific approval from Islamabad. They say violating Pakistani sovereignty would anger the Pakistani people and could affect U.S. use of the country as a base from which to resupply U.S. forces in Afghanistan.
Jawad said U.S. and Afghan forces know the location of training camps, places Taliban extremists live and where there have been large gatherings of al-Qaida members, but the current rules of engagement have hampered attacking those targets.

"We need to enhance the capacity of hitting these targets," he said.
The recommendations also call for developing direct relationships with Pashtun tribes on the Pakistani side of the border. That engagement has largely been left to Pakistan's security service, which U.S. officials increasingly fear is riddled with extremists and militant sympathizers.

Pakistan and the United States have somewhat contrary short-term interests in the Federally Administered Tribal Area, a Maryland-sized swath of ungoverned territory bordering Afghanistan.
It is home to about 2 million Pakistanis, representing between 20 and 30 fiercely independent tribes, several with well-armed, militant branches. The region also is increasingly home to al-Qaida terrorists and a growing network of foreign fighters, according to Defense Department officials.

Bowing to U.S. pressure, Musharraf three years ago directed a military crack down on the tribal area to root out al-Qaida fighters. The tribes resisted the intrusion into their affairs. Prior to 2007 there were around a dozen tribal attacks a year in Pakistan. Last year there were nearly 100, according to U.S. defense officials.
Many tribes have decades-long associations with al-Qaida leaders, dating back to the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan that they fought against. Al-Qaida leaders have intermarried with the tribes and are a source of arms and weapons.

Now, the defense officials said, Pakistani officials are primarily concerned with negotiating an end to the attacks outside the tribal areas. But the U.S. concern is primarily al-Qaida in the tribal areas, and the negotiations are unlikely to affect al-Qaida's increasingly free rein throughout the region.
© Copyright 2008 Associated Press. All rights reserved.

This, above posted article was already been on the bord, but its is very much connected to a plan (theory) caled.... THE NEW GREAT GAME.
PLZ, try to put above posted article, in the line of this theory... THE GREAT GAME!

The new Great Game

The 'war on terror' is being used as an excuse to further US energy interests in the Caspian

Lutz Kleveman The Guardian, Monday October 20 2003
Article history

Nearly two years ago, I travelled to Kyrgyzstan, the mountainous ex-Soviet republic in Central Asia, to witness a historical event: the deployment of the first American combat troops on former Soviet soil.
As part of the Afghan campaign, the US air force set up a base near the Kyrgyz capital, Bishkek. Brawny pioneers in desert camouflages were erecting hundreds of tents for nearly 3,000 soldiers. I asked their commander, a wiry brigadier general, if and when the troops would leave Kyrgyzstan (and its neighbour Uzbekistan, where Washington set up a second airbase). "There is no time limit," he replied. "We will pull out only when all al-Qaeda cells have been eradicated."
Today, the Americans are still there and many of the tents have been replaced by concrete buildings. Bush has used his massive military build-up in Central Asia to seal the cold war victory against Russia, to contain Chinese influence and to tighten the noose around Iran. Most importantly, however, Washington - supported by the Blair government - is exploiting the "war on terror" to further American oil interests in the Caspian region. But this geopolitical gamble involving thuggish dictators and corrupt Saudi oil sheiks is only likely to produce more terrorists.

For much of the past two years, I have researched the links between conflict in Central Asia and US oil interests. I travelled thousands of kilometres, meeting with generals, oil bosses, warlords and diplomats. They are all players in a geostrategic struggle - the new Great Game.

In this rerun of the first great game - the 19th-century imperial rivalry between the British Empire and Tsarist Russia - players once again position themselves to control the heart of the Eurasian landmass. Today, the US has taken over the leading role from the British. Along with the Russians, new regional powers, such as China, Iran, Turkey and Pakistan, have entered the arena, and transnational oil corporations are also pursuing their own interests.
The main spoils in today's Great Game are Caspian oil and gas. On its shores, and at the bottom of the Caspian Sea, lie the world's biggest untapped fossil fuel resources. Estimates range from 110 to 243bn barrels of crude, worth up to $4 trillion. According to the US department of energy, Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan alone could sit on more than 130bn barrels, more than three times the US's reserves. Oil giants such as ExxonMobil, ChevronTexaco and BP have already invested more than $30bn in new production facilities.
"I cannot think of a time when we have had a region emerge as suddenly to become as strategically significant as the Caspian," said Dick Cheney in a speech to oil industrialists in 1998. In May 2001, the US vice-president recommended in the national energy policy report that "the president makes energy security a priority of our trade and foreign policy", singling out the Caspian basin as a "rapidly growing new area of supply".

With a potential oil production of up to 6m barrels per day by 2015, the Caspian region has become crucial to the US policy of "diversifying energy supply".
It is designed to wean the US off its dependence on the Arab-dominated Opec cartel, which is using its near-monopoly position as pawn and leverage against industrialised countries. As global oil consumption keeps surging and many oil wells outside the Middle East are nearing depletion, Opec is expanding its share of the world market. At the same time, the US will have to import more than two-thirds of its total energy demand by 2020, mostly from the Middle East.
Many people in Washington are particularly uncomfortable with the growing power of Saudi Arabia. There is a fear that radical Islamist groups could topple the corrupt Saud dynasty and stop the flow of oil to "infidels". To stave off political turmoil, the regime in Riyadh funds the radical Islamic Wahabbi sect that foments terror against Americans around the world.
In a desperate effort to decrease its dependence on Saudi oil sheiks, the US seeks to control the Caspian oil resources. However, fierce conflicts have broken out over pipeline routes. Russia, still regarding itself as imperial overlord of its former colonies, promotes pipeline routes across its territory, including Chechnya, in the north Caucasus. China, the increasingly oil-dependent waking giant in the region, wants to build eastbound pipelines from Kazakhstan. Iran is offering its pipeline network via the Persian Gulf.
By contrast, Washington champions two pipelines that would circumvent both Russia and Iran. One would run from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to the Indian Ocean. Construction has already begun for a $3.8bn pipeline from Azerbaijan's capital, Baku, via neighbouring Georgia to Turkey's Mediterranean port of Ceyhan. BP, its main operator, has invested billions in oil-rich Azerbaijan, and can count on support from the Bush administration, which recently stationed about 500 elite troops in war-torn Georgia.
Washington's Great Game opponents, particularly in Moscow and Beijing, resent what they perceive as arrogant imperialism. Worried that the US presence might encourage internal unrest in its Central Asian province of Xingjiang, China has recently held joint military exercises with Kyrgyzstan. The Russian government initially tolerated the intrusion into its former empire, hoping Washington would in turn ignore the atrocities in Chechnya. However, the much-hyped "new strategic partnership" against terror between the Kremlin and the White House has turned out to be more of a temporary tactical teaming-up. For the majority of the Russian establishment it is unthinkable to permanently cede its hegemonic claims on Central Asia.
Two weeks ago, Russia's defence minister, Sergei Ivanov, demanded publicly that the Americans pull out within two years. Ominously, President Putin has signed new security pacts with the Central Asian rulers, allowing Russian troops to set up a new military base in Kyrgyzstan, which lies only 35 miles away from the US airbase.
Besides raising the spectre of inter-state conflict, the Bush administration is wooing some of the region's most tyrannical dictators. One of them is Islam Karimov, the ex-communist ruler of Uzbekistan, whose regime brutally suppresses any opposition and Islamic groups. "Such people must be shot in the head. If necessary, I will shoot them myself," Karimov once told his rubber-stamp parliament.
Although the US state department acknowledges that Uzbek security forces use "torture as a routine investigation technique", Washington last year gave the Karimov regime $500m in aid and rent payments for the US air base in Chanabad. The state department also quietly removed Uzbekistan from its annual list of countries where freedom of religion is under threat. The British government seems to support Washington's policy, as Whitehall recently recalled its ambassador Craig Murray from Tashkent after he openly decried Uzbekistan's abysmal human rights record.
Worse is to come: disgusted with the US's cynical alliances with their corrupt and despotic rulers, the region's impoverished populaces increasingly embrace virulent anti-Americanism and militant Islam. As in Iraq, America's brazen energy imperialism in Central Asia jeopardises the few successes in the war on terror because the resentment it causes makes it ever easier for terrorist groups to recruit angry young men. It is all very well to pursue oil interests, but is it worth mortgaging our security to do so?

TO, CONTACT AURTHR OF GREAT GAME CANBE CONTACTED ONTHE FOLLOWING ADRESS..............>>>>>>>>>>>

Fletcher & Parry, LLC
Literary Agency Conville & Walsh Limited
78 Fifth Avenue - Third Floor
New York, New York 10011
2 Ganton Street
London, W1F 7QL
tel (212) 614-0778
fax (212) 614-0728
Phone: 020 7287 3030
Fax: 020 7287 4545

This a very bad reality, that MUSHARAF had tried to answer every question, which was asked by US & its ALLIES.
1. USA & allies asked MUSHARAF to implement so called , DEMOCRACY!!!
MUSHARAF did implemented that?
2. Acess to intelligence & to cut support to TALIBANS, MUSHARAF did that?
3. To, cut the size of PAKISTAN ARMY, he did that, as ARMY CHIEF?

4. To give, basses to USA FOR ITS HUMMANTARIAN ....SUPPORT. he did give thm insted , hue and cry from different , cummunities of the nation.

5.USA wanted, to make a deal with, BENAZIR BHUTTO & to delete NRO, he did that?

6. USA asked MUSHARAF to leave his unifrm... and to leave the status of ARMY CHEIF... he did that too?

MUSHARAF did everything whatever he was asked, all these demands were smartly prepred and smartly conducted. As a result, MUSHARAF became a victm of his own actions, he was the most famous person in pakistan once, now he is the most hated person in pakistan.

With all his misdeeds, he is the most exprienced person to undo
"THE GREAT GAME" but , he have to start thinking by his own and should start giving the answers to the problums , of common man in PAKISTAN, common man in pakistan isnt worried about DEMOCRACY..... JUSTICE SYSTEM............ BUT the common man in pakistan is worried about ROTI, KAPRA, MAKAN & HIS SAFTY?????...

 

[ghazi]

Army has now abandoned its former boss. Musharraf was no choice but leave without a whimper. Nobody is above the law. He is given a choice between resigning or face impeachment, no safe passage of exile( in Turkey, where he built 6 million dollar mansion) should be given to him. He should be tried for all his misdeeds in open forum in accordance with the law. If he is not impeached with 2/3 majority he should be allowed to complete his term.

 

[blain2]

Army has now abandoned its former boss. Musharraf was no choice but leave without a whimper. Nobody is above the law. He is given a choice between resigning or face impeachment, no safe passage of exile( in Turkey, where he built 6 million dollar mansion) should be given to him. He should be tried for all his misdeeds in open forum in accordance with the law. If he is not impeached with 2/3 majority he should be allowed to complete his term.

What misdeeds? You want to be all inconclusive or only go after the guy that you personally dislike?

 

[JK!]

no safe passage of exile in Turkey, where he built 6 million dollar mansion

You have any proof of this?

 

[batmannow]

The pursuers and the prey



By Ardeshir Cowasjee

AT play: Our insecure elected and unelected political players, some corrupt to the core. The aim: Dependent upon the contours of their overflowing pockets, they shoot at half-****. The beneficiaries: The politicos and their progeny in perpetuity. The losers: The poor people of poor Pakistan.
What we have seen in our press last week is indicative of the state of the nation and of its lamentable leadership — one of the two main leaders, both unelected, sports a permanent grin exposing what seem to be falsified teeth, the other sports what we know to be false hair. Such are the main players of the latest national game, imbued with distrust of each other and hatred for the common enemy, the president of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan supposedly in the throes of reconciliation.

The two main players, plus their main acolytes, inspire no confidence. They choose to ignore the needs of the people who so rashly elected their parties into power, they ignore the crippling and massively rising inflation, the steady fall of the Pakistani rupee, the erosion of the stock market, the alarming advance of the forces of Talibanisation. They are blinkered and obsessed with a one-point agenda — a vacant presidential chair over which to squabble.

The media is chock-a-block with diverse views on this latest ploy and one main reaction is: can they be believed? Many maintain they cannot, for they have lied to themselves and to the nation for five solid months. Why should they now change tack? Neither Asif Zardari nor Nawaz Sharif are known and honoured for their moral probity. Their track record belies the nation’s hopes that they could actually mean what they say.
As for the prey, there is no denying that President General Pervez Musharraf has much to answer for. On his own admission, he is guilty of violating the constitution which is no stranger to violations, its first violation coming within four hours of its birth by its maker and the maker of the old original PPP, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto.
The brave and worthy coalition partners are drawing up a list of Musharraf’s sins, and it is to be hoped that atop the list will sit his major sin which has violated the constitution in letter and in spirit — the promulgation of the National Reconciliation Ordinance. The constitution, mutilated as it is, does not sanction the robbing of the nation’s assets, murder or mayhem.
If Zardari has one honest bone in his body he will acknowledge the wickedness of the NRO and return to this failing nation all the ill-gotten gains that he has retrieved thanks to the machinations of Musharraf and the United States of America.

The game is on, with the pursuers on the one hand giving no time frame for it to be played out whilst on the other setting forth time frames that change with the day. Whatever or however, this novel sport can have neither a swift nor a clean ending. It will be messy and dangerous and, all things being equal, the possibility does exist that there will be no winner but only losers. It is a dirty game, the buying has already begun and the figure being bandied about the country is a mere Rs25m per sold soul. By our political standards this is a poor show. Zardari and Nawaz together can pool a far healthier and more enticing sum.
The government put together by the coalition and then torn asunder is recognised by all, nationally and internationally, as having been in a paralytic state since it was formed in late March. It has done nothing but shovel off the blame for all the ills it should have at least attempted to tackle on to the shoulders of the last inept government which was voted out and its erstwhile godfather, General Musharraf. It has given no thought to alleviating the country’s plight. It has been solidly self-centred.
This is a fact universally acknowledged as is the fact that the impeachment of Musharraf has no bearing on the well-being of the country, politically or economically, as whether he goes or not this government and the two coalition parties will continue to squabble and wrangle over non-issues which affect their personal power bases.
The coalition has teetered on the brink of collapse, with Zardari and Sharif being hardly on speaking terms for varied periods of time. In their heart of hearts, they dislike, perhaps even despise each other,
as David Blair writing in The Daily Telegraph (London) on Aug 8 has suggested. “Throughout the 1990s,” he writes, “their parties competed for the spoils of office, and each took pitiless vengeance against the other whenever they had the chance. Thus Mr Sharif, as prime minister between 1996 and 1999, launched case after case against Mr Zardari and ensured that he went to prison on corruption charges without ever having been convicted. Meanwhile, Mr Zardari persecuted Mr Sharif whenever the PPP was in power.”
Not a pretty record, and not easily forgotten or forgiven. “All these vendettas are now packed inside a single administration; the move against the president is merely the most obvious sign of the infighting.” Unity against a common enemy is the name of the game, an enemy who has no love lost for “self-serving and inept civilian politicians”.
Blair rightly has it that by trying to impeach his “nemesis”, Musharraf, Sharif is gleefully settling scores. His expression at the famous press conference would endorse this. Zardari resents Musharraf because he kept him in jail and then in exile, and this was fully evidenced in his venomous spitting out of the name “Musharraaaf” when referring to the presidential impeachment plan. He is equally gleefully biting the hand that has fed him so substantially with the NRO.
He also had the gall to state to one press person who asked him an awkward question that “democracy does not ask, it tells”. This is just another variation of the PPP-Z slogan about democracy being the best revenge. The impeachment move has nothing to do with democracy and all to do with revenge. How can it work out when the intent is such?
This constitutional and legal method of ridding themselves of an enemy is, per se, good news to many. One must hope that the current jubilation is not as misplaced as the jubilation witnessed after the results of the Feb 18 election.

The danger lies in a power vacuum and infighting which will immensely please the Taliban forces of the frontier regions which are likely to exploit the official paralysis and “the tangled web of today’s politics”.

arfc@cyber.net.pk
August 10, 2008 Sunday Sha’aban 7, 1429
Welcome to DAWN, Pakistan's most widely circulated English language newspaper

Updated round-the-clock, with a major update before 10:00 PST (+06:00 GMT)