MARTIAL LAW TO SAVE THE COUNTRY?

[JK!]

This fiasco could have entirely been avoided had governance of Pakistan had been the priority instead of Musharraf bashing.

If he leaves/is removed then what next? I can't see this current government taking decisive action at all except to cause civil strife to consolidate their own wealth and positions.

In a way PPP or PML N dictatorship is going to emerge.

 

[vish]

This fiasco could have entirely been avoided had governance of Pakistan had been the priority instead of Musharraf bashing.

If he leaves/is removed then what next? I can't see this current government taking decisive action at all except to cause civil strife to consolidate their own wealth and positions.

In a way PPP or PML N dictatorship is going to emerge.

How is a democratically elected government a dictatorship?

 

[roadrunner]

RR-thats a internal view only - in this time and age if martial law is imposed, we will be isolated in a jiffy. even china our steadfast friend might have difficulty in supporting us.

Martial law has been implemented lots of times in the past. It's a temporary situation lasting only a month or so. Musharraf implemented it in 1999, he didn't isolate Pakistan. If anything sanctions got lifted, because he knew how to play it diplomatically unlike NS. Nothing wrong with martial law at all..In fact, if the situation like Pakistan existed in the US, there would be martial law declared there to wipe out all the suicide bombers.

In fact, what I'm suggesting is more like, another coup, military take over for the next 20 years, and run the country effectively, increase education, reduce poverty, then let NS and Zardari take over. You will find they won't be able to buy votes, and people will be making educated choices that make for real democratic voting.

Democracy is the best because in democracy every politician sooner or later has to face the people. In this way if he has done nothing he is kicked out. If we let democracy work in Pakistan for say around 20 years then I am confident that most of the corrupt politicians will be wiped out. If one looks at the period 1988 to 1999 then one notices that some of the corrupt politicians lost the elections and were no more a part of the system. Even Mr. Zardari is not a member of National Assembly.

Democracy is not the best for Pakistan yet. Pakistan does not have the foundations for democracy. the people are poor and uneducated, the politicians extremely rich. When such a wide gap exists, the people can be bough since their vote is cheap. Until the economy improves and the politician:people financial situation is more equal, there's no point in claiming democracy even exists in Pakistan since politicians can easily buy votes.

If you want Pakistan to continue to be exploited, keep chanting out democracy. You'll get your wish.

 

[vish]

Martial law has been implemented lots of times in the past. It's a temporary situation lasting only a month or so. Musharraf implemented it in 1999, he didn't isolate Pakistan. If anything sanctions got lifted, because he knew how to play it diplomatically unlike NS. Nothing wrong with martial law at all..In fact, if the situation like Pakistan existed in the US, there would be martial law declared there to wipe out all the suicide bombers.

History has shown that the implementation of martial law in Pakistan has not been short and has been damaging to the country's institutions.

In fact, what I'm suggesting is more like, another coup, military take over for the next 20 years, and run the country effectively, increase education, reduce poverty, then let NS and Zardari take over. You will find they won't be able to buy votes, and people will be making educated choices that make for real democratic voting.

Learn from history. This has never happened; conclusion: in all likelyhood never will.

Democracy is not the best for Pakistan yet. Pakistan does not have the foundations for democracy. the people are poor and uneducated, the politicians extremely rich. When such a wide gap exists, the people can be bough since their vote is cheap. Until the economy improves and the politician:people financial situation is more equal, there's no point in claiming democracy even exists in Pakistan since politicians can easily buy votes.

Tell that to the millions of your countrymen who voted in the elections.

 

[roadrunner]

History has shown that the implementation of martial law in Pakistan has not been short and has been damaging to the country's institutions.

Martial Law probably isn't a very good term here. Military rule is probably better. For a lot of Musharraf's rule (4 years?) it was not martial law. To be clear, martial law existed during the first couple of years of his rule afaik. So to be clear, let's just say military rule instead of martial law.

On the subject of Institutions, military rule has greatly strengthened them. It was civilian governments under democracy that weakened institutions. The press enjoyed most freedom under military rule (musharraf's in fact). Education grew at an unprecedented rate. The economy grew at the fastest rate over this time, and the greatest achievement under military rule was perhaps the admittance of the most number of women National Assembly members (again under military/Musharraf's rule). With such a strong showing, it's amazing so many uneducated women voted for someone other than Musharraf - this again is an example of the tribalistic and uneducated nature of Pakistani society as it stands. This needs to be sorted out before democracy can take a positive hold in Pakistan.

Lear from history. This has never happened; conclusion: in all likelyhood never will.

Well, that's a great argument. Any reason though why this isn't the best scenario, aside from "it never will happen?"

Tell that to the millions of your countrymen who voted in the elections.

And my whole point which you missed is that Pakistanis are undereducated and poor, the politician:civilian wealth is too great which leads to corruption, and therefore makes democracy unpalateable! Please read what I type before replying with spam.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

Tell that to the millions of your countrymen who voted in the elections.

actually 34 million people voted. 10.3 million for Pro Musharraf's party and 17 for anti-musharaf parties.
and btw how many people are you aware of in 1999 military coup took to the streets?

 

[vish]

Martial Law probably isn't a very good term here. Military rule is probably better. For a lot of Musharraf's rule (4 years?) it was not martial law. To be clear, martial law existed during the first couple of years of his rule afaik. So to be clear, let's just say military rule instead of martial law.

On the subject of Institutions, military rule has greatly strengthened them. It was civilian governments under democracy that weakened institutions. The press enjoyed most freedom under military rule (musharraf's in fact). Education grew at an unprecedented rate. The economy grew at the fastest rate over this time, and the greatest achievement under military rule was perhaps the admittance of the most number of women National Assembly members (again under military/Musharraf's rule). With such a strong showing, it's amazing so many uneducated women voted for someone other than Musharraf - this again is an example of the tribalistic and uneducated nature of Pakistani society as it stands. This needs to be sorted out before democracy can take a positive hold in Pakistan.

The economic growth had nothing to do with the government. There was a genuine upswiung around the corner. 9/11 added wings to it. The National Assembly then was a rubber stamp parliament; the people there were just a show; they did nothing without GHQ's nod. When I say instituitions, I imply institutions like the CAG, beaureacracy, judiciary, police forces, various public departments, election commission, independsent media, etc. These are only created in a democracy and mature with a democracy.

Well, that's a great argument. Any reason though why this isn't the best scenario, aside from "it never will happen?"

And my whole point which you missed is that Pakistanis are undereducated and poor, the politician:civilian wealth is too great which leads to corruption, and therefore makes democracy unpalateable! Please read what I type before replying with spam.

Military rule has ruined Pakistan; you look at the "hard" factors (economic growth rate, number of bombings, etc.) and not the "soft" factors (errosion of the Army's credibility and fighting acumen, errosion of country's democratic values, neglect of law and constitution, etc.).


"Spam": you really can't argue in a sane manner, can you?


Let me look at your logic:
Pakistanis are uneducated and poor = Pakistanis do not have enough brains to know what is good for them and cannot be trusted to vote = Pakistanis are sub-humans.

Care to clear this logic, or its lack?

 

[vish]

actually 34 million people voted. 10.3 million for Pro Musharraf's party and 17 for anti-musharaf parties.
and btw how many people are you aware of in 1999 military coup took to the streets?

In a coup, more often than not, people do not take to the streats because they fear being shot.

By the way, stupid analogy.

 

[fatman17]

^^^i am afraid i have to agree with vish on the arguments being made above.

 

[pak voice]

I agree with the comments of vish, & can anyone tell how many developed nations on the face of the earth have experienced military coup..?? whereas it came to pak 2-3 times...

Military should not exceed its limits and should concentrate on their job rather than jumping into politics in the name of saving country.. & then deploying their retired army men to the top lucrative cash earning positions in government..

 

[roadrunner]

The economic growth had nothing to do with the government. There was a genuine upswiung around the corner. 9/11 added wings to it.

That's convenient! Pakistan was going to experience an upswing in growth coincidentally when Musharraf took power and placed Aziz in fiscal charge, and then to experience a decline when Musharraf and Aziz left the government! Musharraf and Aziz had nothing to do with it! Convenient indeed. Did i tell you also that when Mohammed Yousuf walks out onto the field, it's actually me under the helmet with a fake beard attached to my chin? All his hundreds are actually mine, nothing to do with him! Nothing to do with the government indeed, what a lousy argument!

Fiscal policy is what turned round Pakistan's economy post 911. Monetary policy. Nothing to do with a global turnaround in the market OR an automatic change in the right direction. Remember Pakistan was headed towards default prior to Musharraf taking over, it then came to being the fastest growing economy in the world under Musharraf, it is now slowing down under the new government. Fiscal policy is all that matters.

Remember another thing. Had it not been for Musharraf, Pakistan would have been reduced to rubble post 911 had he not balanced on the tightrope and appeased the Americans as well as his own people. Another leader at the time would probably have got the country bombed or started a civil war.

The National Assembly then was a rubber stamp parliament; the people there were just a show; they did nothing without GHQ's nod. When I say instituitions, I imply institutions like the CAG, beaureacracy, judiciary, police forces, various public departments, election commission, independsent media, etc. These are only created in a democracy and mature with a democracy.

Well, it would help if you knew something about Pakistan before commenting on it. The National Assembly under Musharraf was not a rubber stamp assembly. It was directly elected by the people in the 2002 General Elections, which Musharraf had won. All the reforms Musharraf passed through had to go through the National Assembly including the women's Bills, and so on. There goes your rubber stamp National Assembly claim. The number of women in the National Assembly increased under Musharraf, he also got rid of the Hudood Laws, something no other government did.

Now your other claims about election commision and independent media are nonsense.

Election commission.
This is the first time that general elections are being held in the presence of a vibrant media with more than 65 TV channels and 85 FM radio stations in the country.

It is for the first time that domestic observers are monitoring the elections in Pakistan. The Free and Fair Election Network (FAFEN), established with the help of The Asia Foundation and the UN Development Programme (UNDP), has sent 20,000 observers.
No rules binding media coverage of polls: Election Commission | TwoCircles.net

Add to that in 2002, it was the first time EU observers were allowed to monitor the electoral process in the history of Pakistan, and I think even you must now agree that Musharraf and the military actually strengthened the case for democracy in Pakistan. As the quote says, media was not restricted at all during the General Elections, they were given a free hand by the leadership.

I'm not sure how Musharraf weakened the police force, perhaps you can enlighten me on this.

the Judiciary I'll disagree with also. For the first time in history, a Pakistani leader lost a court case, and abided by the judgement of the judiciary. Musharraf allowed the CJ to stay. What happened afterwards was a purge, but Pakistan is in need of purging certain elements that do not deserve their elitist positions. Afaik, it is within the President's right to call an inquest into the judiciary, though not to remove him unilaterally.

Military rule has ruined Pakistan; you look at the "hard" factors (economic growth rate, number of bombings, etc.) and not the "soft" factors (errosion of the Army's credibility and fighting acumen, errosion of country's democratic values, neglect of law and constitution, etc.).

Right.."hard" factors. Let's see.. Economic growth was highest under Musharraf and the military with KSE being the strongest stock exchange on the planet, GDP growth the highest on the planet, credit ratings on the rise, macroeconomic position solid. Now every media outlet is reporting Pakistan's weak macroeconomic position, and even the credit rating of Standard and Poor's has dropped in the last couple of months since the new government took over. Coincidence?

Have bombings stopped? Didn't the Danish Embassy get bombed a couple of days ago, and haven't scores of paramiliatries been killed in recent months when the government took over? You fail to see, Musharraf was not the cause of resentment by these radicals. The radicals will attack any government in power until they establish a caliphate. Zardari just blamed the attacks as Musharraf's fault in order to grab a position in the hot seat. Reality, these bombings were going to happen whoever was leading Pakistan.

"Spam": you really can't argue in a sane manner, can you?

Your arguments have been proven to be incorrect on this thread, and your facts have been proven to be incorrect on the history thread. I don't think it's a question of sanity.

Let me look at your logic:
Pakistanis are uneducated and poor = Pakistanis do not have enough brains to know what is good for them and cannot be trusted to vote = Pakistanis are sub-humans.

Care to clear this logic, or its lack?

It's your interpretation of what I said, which is incorrect. Pakistanis being uneducated and poor does not mean Pakistanis are dumb or subhuman - that is your interpretation of my meaning.

What it means, is that Pakistanis are poor (reality and fact), the politicians like NS are extremely rich - therefore one vote is very cheap to a politician in Pakistan. In the West, one vote is much more expensive because the differential is not so great. Essentially, you're using a strawman argument here, which is the sign of a very weak argument.

I'll let you think about it. If I contested a General Election in Pakistan with $5,000,000 at my disposal (probably a small fraction of what NS and Zardari have), I could already bag at least 5 million voters. Add to this, the tribalistic nature of the society, and you have whole scores of people being told how to vote. Until these factors are sorted out, the idea of democracy in Pakistan is delusional.

 

[mujahideen]

I agree with the comments of vish, & can anyone tell how many developed nations on the face of the earth have experienced military coup..?? whereas it came to pak 2-3 times...
Military should not exceed its limits and should concentrate on their job rather than jumping into politics in the name of saving country.. & then deploying their retired army men to the top lucrative cash earning positions in government..

I agree with you where you say the Army should not get involved in politics. They have a duty to protect our borders. But I ask you has the Army ever come into power on its own. The fact is that the Army has always been handed power. Our politicians have always insisted that the Army get involved. Even today I hear call by some people urging General Kayani to take over and remove President Musharraf.

 

[blain2]

I agree with the comments of vish, & can anyone tell how many developed nations on the face of the earth have experienced military coup..?? whereas it came to pak 2-3 times...

Military should not exceed its limits and should concentrate on their job rather than jumping into politics in the name of saving country.. & then deploying their retired army men to the top lucrative cash earning positions in government..

Pakistanis deserve every bit of martial law, boots and guns that they get shoved down their throats. When you are not responsible enough to run the country, do you think others including Army would keep on letting you screw things up? No they are going to get in (even though they themselves may not be able to do much either) and take over.

This is a reality and a lesson for all, not just the Army. Take care of that country...it was not had easily....over a million died for her and yet all we are satisfied with is the blame game. Its the Army, its the Army and its the Army! .

 

[mujahideen]

Its the Army, its the Army and its the Army! .

Its the Army. When war is looming this same Army goes to our borders to defend us, its the Army. When the enemy is gaining land this same Army asks its soldiers to tie bombs to their chest just to protect us, its the Army. When politicians loot the country its the Army. When the Army takes over from corrupt politicians it the Army. Is it the Army or is it us?

 

[opinion786]

=vish;162763]I still don’t see a connection between military dictatorship and development. If there would have been a democratic government, the numbers would have been the same.

This is a huge assumption by you, which didn't occur in the last 50 years! But under Musharraf it did happen! For the first time in Pakistan's 60 years:

Pakistan's economy grew by 100% --- to become $ 160 billion
Revenue grew by 100% --- to become $ 11.4 billion
Foreign Reserves grew by 500% --- to become $ 17 billion
Exports grew by 100% --- to become $ 18.5 billion
Textile exports grew by 100% --- to become $ 11.2 billion
Karachi Stock Exchange grew by 500% --- to become $ 65 billion
Foreign Direct Investment grew by 500% --- to become $ 8 billion
Annual Debt servicing decreased by 35% --- to become 26%
Poverty decreased by 10% --- to become 24%
literacy rate grew by 10% --- to become 54%
Public development Funds grew by 100% --- to become Rs 520 billion

Welcome to democracy; the elected leaders call the shots. If these elected leaders are backed by father figures, it is these who call the shots. The reason why Zardari is so powerful is that there is no “opposition.” Once that happens, things might change. Mind you, Zardari can be thrown out by the civil population.

Welcome to DEMON-CRAZY ! We always had oppositions. Our leaders are corrupt and inept. Maybe you are willing to give away your country to corrupt rulers, but not us. We want clean and honest DELIVERING leaders!

I agree; I’m also not saying that Musharraf has not done anything for Pakistan. But he, like all military dictators, has ensured that the country is solely dependent on him; there are no national level civil institutions in your country; this is Pakistan’s biggest headache. Democratically elected leaders do not mess the country’s institutions so badly.

Actually your knowledge about PAK is not complete and your views are based upon assumptions. Otherwsie, you would have known that:
1- Nawaz approved the 13th & 14th amedments to make him a unchallenged King of Parliament where there were no checks & balances on him.
2- Nawaz stormed the Supreme Court PAK and his workers orchestrated a well organised riot inside the premises.
3- Nawaz fought with 4 Army Chiefs.
4- He fought with his party members & his essence of democracy was: father's friend as President of PAk, brother the CM of Punjab, himself PM of PAK and daughter's father-in-law the Fianace Minister.
5- He robbed the country of Foreign reserves of $10 billion. Is this robbery fine in India??
6- He fought with 2 Presidents of Pakistan, and later promoted his dad's friend as a PUPPET Presdient.
7- Zardari honestly needs no comments - he is another fine example of Monarchy robbed by his wife!

If there would have been no 9/11, the world would have been the same: Taliban rule in Afghanistan, etc.

With Afghanistan now being taken over by the US, these extremists have decided to target Pakistan.

That why our Armed forces had to patrol on NWFP border - some people call it the WoT. this patrolling was done by Armed Forces to STOP:

1- Cross boder infiltration from Afghan into NWFP.
2- Espionage mission of RAW (sorry) agents into NWFP.
3- Illegal crossig of refugees and immigrants into NWFP. We already have 25 Lakhs of these from the 1980's.
4- Illegal weapons and ammunition crossing over into NWFP.
5- The safe haven that the Uzbeks, Tajiks, Arabs, Afghans, etc had created in mountains of NWFP.

When a country goes to war, all countries surrounding its border increase the security levels to red alert and increase surviellence. PAK took no different approach.

Democratic rulers are elected by Pakistanis; they are not dictators.

Fact: Out of 160 million **** only 27 million voted. Out of which PPP got 10 million, PML-Q got 8 million and PML-N got 7 million and other parties the remaining.

Around 140 million **** DID NOT VOTE!

Military dictators have abused Pakistan far more than democratically elected leaders.

Again your assumption. Better saying than proving. PAK was a fialed state under Nawaz. Below are only FEW examples and I have 40 examples. Under Nawaz:

1- In 1999, Revenue generation of around Rs.308 billion could not meet the growing expenditure requirements; with only an average of Rs.80 billion being spent on Public sector development programs (PSDP) annually, and no visible project to boast about.
2- From this Rs.308 billion around 65% was being utilized for debt servicing.
3- In 1988 Pakistan’s foreign debt was $18 billion, but at the end of 1999 it had accumulated to become $38 billion. A 100% increased burden on the already crippled economy.
4- Public and external debt exceeded 300% of Foreign exchange earnings. Pakistan had become a highly indebted poor country.
5- Poverty levels also increased to become 35% according to economic survey.
6- Foreign reserves ONLY $700 million.
7- Foreign investment less than $1 billion
8- Exports stagnated at $7 billion.


AGAIN, BEFORE 9/11 Musharraf had already improved the Economy.

In that SHORT span of 2 years BEFORE 9/11,
1-Pakistan’s revenue increased from Rs.308 billion to become Rs.395 billion.
2-Exports increased from $7.5 billion to become $9.2 billion.
3-Foreign Reserves increased from $1 billion to become $3.25 billion.
4-Debt servicing as a ratio to Revenue decreased from 65% to 57%.
5-Public and external debt as a percentage to Foreign exchange earnings declined from 300% to 250%.
6-Current account deficit decreased from $2.4 billion to become $510 million. 7-Pakistan’s large-scale manufacturing grew by 11% in June 2001 against 3.5% in 1998.


IN THIS SHORT SPAN OF TWO months of Demon-cratic govt:

1- Foreign reserves fell from $16 billion to $12 billion.
2- Rupee devalued from Rs.61 per dollar to Rs.70 per dollar.
3- Inflation highest ever.
4- Foreign investment of $12 billion flew away to Dubai and India (happy)
5- KHI stock exchange fell by 2000 points.

What future do we have under these IDIOTS who are actually FEUDALS and inherited democracy through Monarchy and the rest are mafia-business men.

Musharraf our leader!