Musharraf Era was best in 63-year history of Pakistan: Dr. Salman Shah

[niaz]

Democratically elected leader is not guaranteed to be better than a non democratic dictator. It is possible that an autocratic Head of the State, such as Lee Kwan of Singapore can push thru reforms which are of great benefit to the country in the long run regardless of the short term pain.This can be achieved because an autocrat does not care whether he wins next election or not. Democratic leaders on the other hand are in general experts in ‘compromises’ which could possibly win them next election but may not be good for the state.

Finally, caliber of the person matters a great deal. To see our leaders in proper perspective let us examine the Pakistan political scene.

Nawaz Sharif and family: It is no secret that Nawaz Sharif was handpicked by Zia ul Haq and nurtured to rival Junejo, a gentle soul if any. Nawaz Sharif therefore didn’t rise to the PML leadership on his own merit. Nawaz Sharif is neither very well educated (BB & Imran Khan) nor he had to compete in ISSB; I doubt if he would have made the grade.

Asif Zardari: His interests lie with horses. His claim to fame is that he married BB, else he would have been managing the Bambino cinema owned by his family.

The Chaudhry brothers: They have no doubt a strong political pedigree, but let us face it; they have always been second line politicians and never really thought capable of ultimate leadership.

Isfandyar Wali Khan: This family produced two outstanding figures (Bacha Khan and Dr Khan sahib) , 2nd and third generation is reaping rewards of their illustrious grand father.

Pir of Pagaro: What other qualification does he have except being Pir of the Hurs?

Munawwar Hasan: Less is said about this Taliban loving bigot the better. He is not even a facsimile of Maulana Maudoodi in scholarship.

Mulana Fazlur Rahman: Only qualification is being born to Mufti Mahmood.

Imran Khan: No doubt well educated and honest. But does any one really think that he has any chance to win?

Pervez Musharraf on the other hand reached the high rank of Lt General on his own merit, whether he should have been promoted to COAS is beside the point. His first three years; before he was seduced to the Chaudhry bandwagon; were periods of very good governance. Man for man, he is definitely head and shoulders above the Sharifs, Chaudhries and Zardaris. However, precisely because of his forthrightness (he does not speak with a forked tongue) it is doubtful that he would ever again become leader of Pakistan.

 

[T-Faz]

Such respect and admiration tarnished severely in the 1965 war, which Ayub unnecessarily prolonged. As Bhutto told the U.S. ambassador, he and Ayub were willing to keep Pakistan fighting no matter what the cost in Pakistani blood and treasure, and no matter how unsuccessful the Pakistani Army was in the field. The only way to stop the conflict was for the U.S. to suspend arms shipments.

True, if it wasn't for the 65 war, things would have gone down a different and a much better path.

"Destroyed your nation"! You don't think you can help rebuild it?

No.

 

[aks18]

o comeon dude seriously? First of all this is a Defense forum and don't use this language even for imran khan! secondly You talk about loans? loans??????? seriously you need a reality check buddy! I know you are imran khan supporter but stop mixing reality with fiction! There should be some limit of hate! we all are youth and i guess for one reason i like Musharraf's supporters since they respect imran khan and they always want both of them to join hands but problem with imran supporters is that they still want divided politics even in this time of affairs! YouTube - President Pervez Musharraf's achievements {1999-2007}

now you talk about pakistan taking 10 billion from pakistan? You must be really joking man! pakistan's economy is 570 million plus a year and you are saying those 10 billion would of helped over 7 years of period? those $10 billions were given to pakistan for WOT now out of those 10 billion half of them 5 billion or so went for reimbursements in form of repair for our euipments, "jet's bullets,oil, war pay of soilders, reconstruction, overhul etc" how about you watch this video lol
YouTube - EXCELLENT REPLY TO 10 BILLION DOLLARS Musharraf Fareed Zakaria interview - Part 1.flv

m not getting why u guys are comparing 8 years of dictatorship with 2 , 2 years of incomplete democratic governments . in 1999 pakistan was under sanctions due to nuclear tests in may 1998 etc how can u compare a tenure with full of sanctions with sanction free tenure ???

 

[VCheng]

Musharraf is not going to be able to regain power, no matter how successful or unsuccessful his previous era is thought to be.

That is the simple bottom line.

Thus, his recent efforts are no more than a ploy just to appease his ego and raise some more money. That's all.

 

[irfan1173]

AoA
If Musharaff wants to come back in politics he needs to be in Pakistan and connect with common people. It seems as of now he plans to run elections in UK or facebook. As far as him being forthright as pointed by Niaz Sir, his handling of Kargil debacle clearly points that he can stoop to same level as politicians to save his back.

 

[The Clarifier]

Musharraf sieged power via air last time.

Why not through television.

 

[VCheng]

The old saying is that "when a jackal wants to die he heads to the city".

 

[iioal malik]

Musharraf no no no never make sure this confused egotistical Punk never come back to pakistan

 

[Solomon2]

"Destroyed your nation"! You don't think you can help rebuild it?

No.

My sad friend, I am here for you if you desire to talk, either publicly or privately.

 

[farhan_9909]

I think if Musharaf didnt came back..Pakistan will fall..and will never rise again

WE need you musharaf.

fcukk the PPP and COme back

 

[graphican]

Call him any name you want to, Musharraf brought you that freedom

Wrong Statement Sir. What about Mobile phone revolution? What about Internet Revolution? Were those also given by Musharaf? With due respect, if I am negatively biased many fellows here positively but still biased towards Musharaf. Let me make my point clear.

1990
The Network Television Marketing was Pakistan's first ever private sector Television Channel started its transmission in 1990.
Reference:Network Television Marketing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1994
1996 Local area transmission from four (4) stations started and extended to 3 more stations. • 1998 Transmission of PTV World programmes started
Reference:Watch Live Pakistan TV PTv News Online – Urdu Pakistani Television Corporation | iMuslimz Network


1996-1998
During early 1990’s satellite television became an irresistible phenomenon in Pakistan, particularly in Punjab. But in 1998, all major channels were transferred to 14 decoders, which were a lot more expensive and the annual subscription was also beyond
the reach of a common man. A man once setup this satellite system for his own personal use and then started providing this service to neighbouring areas against a small fee. Thus, this gave way to the business of cable television networking which established and
flourished in a short period.

1998
The legalization process of cable television networks started in November 1998 and completed in 2000. [Musharaf Era has started] Therefore, in June 2000, cable television networks started functioning legally which initiated a new era of electronic media in Pakistan.

2000-2001
Till December 2001, total number of legal cable operators was
840 across the country. Out of these, a majority of operators were based in Karachi, Lahore and in some other major cities of Punjab. For the running of one small set-up at least 8-10 employees were required. About 8,000 people got employment through this system and were providing livelihood to about 50,000 persons.

The moment Musharaf came into picture, the TV revolution was already on the way. If anybody considers Musharaf was the cause of TV Revolution then he is mistaken. Now coming to other part of same story. - Media in Musharaf's Era

Media in Musharaf's Era

Emergency in Pakistan - Curbs on Media

US cautions Musharraf on media curbs

Musharraf retreats on Pakistan media curbs | Reuters

Musharaf Forced to Back Down on Press Crubs - Reuters

Also Pakistanis are not suffering from Amnesia and remember what this great leader did to Media and them.

If you want to give credit to Musharaf, you can give him credit for not clinching it until he needed. I am not idol worshiper and only want my country to be in right hands and no matter from what angle you look at it, those hands couldn't be that of Musharaf.

 

[graphican]

I think if Musharaf didnt came back..Pakistan will fall..and will never rise again

WE need you musharaf.

fcukk the PPP and COme back

Yes asman se giro lakin khajoor me atko. Are there only two people on the face of the earth who are eligible to hold Pakistan's Leadership?

 

[GentlemanObserver]

I bought a ticked to Imran Khan's dinner in Manchester. It cost me 100£ but it is worth it, the money is going to a worthy cause and i may have the chance to ask him 1 thing.

Mr. Niazi, when are you going to stop being a one man show and get some mobilisation???

People are dying for a leader, they need someone to mobilise the masses. Just look at Altaf Bahi, do you think that guy has more charisma than IK? Clearly not yet when he does his weekly teleconference from London to Karachi, his party members turn out in the 1000's braving raid, sleet or sun to hear their leader speak.

It's all about mobilisation... And before someone labels me a IK supporter, I only support who will do RIGHT by Pakistan.

 

[huma rao]

Please view the following article regarding the poverty reduction claims during Musharraf era:

" Poverty reduction in the Musharraf era
Povert*y reduct*ion estima*tes of the Mushar*raf era are not consis*tent with the magnit*ude of the growth of inequa*lity.
By Dr Akmal Hussain
Published: October 16, 2011
The writer is distinguished professor of economics at Beaconhouse National University in Lahore

A fiery debate erupted last week, on the official poverty estimates made during the previous regime of Pervez Musharraf. Dr Nadeemul Haq, Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission has faced a verbal attack from a concerned former official of the Musharraf government, for expressing scepticism at the latter’s poverty estimates. Even though there was more heat than light in the verbal war, Dr Haq has been “summoned” by a Parliamentary Committee, according to newspaper reports. Under these circumstances, perhaps a reasoned examination of the poverty estimates of the Musharraf government, however brief, may be helpful.

The official estimates claim a decline in the poverty incidence from 34.5 per cent in 2000-01 to 22.7 per cent in 2004-05. This reduction of 11.8 percentage points would suggest that almost one-third of poverty in Pakistan was eliminated within a period of only four years. If accepted at face value, this would probably be the largest poverty reduction over a four-year period in the history of the developing world, and would by far outmatch the poverty reduction performance of the former Soviet Union and China, during their eras of central planning.

Pakistan’s official poverty reduction figures for the period 2000-01 to 2004-05 become even more incredible when the data is disaggregated to the provincial level. Provincial level poverty figures of the official data set show that poverty in rural Sindh declined from 48.3 per cent in 2000-01 to 28.9 per cent over the period. Thus the Musharraf government’s figures would have us believe that over 40 per cent of the poverty problem in Sindh was eliminated within a four year-period of its rule. In terms of this trend, poverty in Sindh ought to have been completely eliminated by the year 2008-09. If this incredible phenomenon occurred, it was certainly not visible to the naked eye in Sindh.

Further doubt is cast over these official poverty figures when we investigate the sources of growth on the basis of national income data for the same period. The results show that 80 per cent of the growth during the period was contributed by the services sector, consisting predominantly of banking, telecommunications and to a lesser extent, trade and transport. In the case of the large-scale manufacturing sector, the predominant driver of growth was automobiles and consumer electronics. Clearly, these sectors neither produce goods for the poor nor employ them. Therefore, the structure of the growth process during the Musharraf period was such that it could not be expected to have a substantial positive impact on poverty.

Furthermore, there was a 70 per cent increase in the food price index in 2007-08; a sharp increase in gas and electricity prices; and a sharp increase in the prices of industrial and agriculture inputs following exchange rate depreciation. The aggregate consequence of the changes in these variables suggests that the positive effect of growth on poverty would be expected to have dampened by the end of the Musharraf regime rather than dramatically increased as the official figures claim.

Finally, given the sharp increase in interpersonal inequality during the period, the trickle down effect of growth would tend to dry up. The mathematical relationship between growth, inequality and poverty is well known: For a given growth rate, the higher the level of inequality, the smaller the trickle-down effect. Indeed, if the inequality at the beginning of a period is high enough and if the growth of inequality is substantially greater than the growth of GDP, than the incidence of poverty may well rise rather than fall. The huge poverty reduction estimates of the Musharraf government are, therefore, not consistent with the magnitude of the growth of inequality estimated from the same data set.

The official poverty data set of the Musharraf regime, which yields a poverty reduction magnitude unmatched in the history of developing countries, is neither internally consistent, nor is it consistent with national income data of Pakistan, nor consistent with the logic of economic science.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 17th, 2011."

 

[ziaulislam]

well sttistics that are confirmed by national and international sources, as well as logic and genral observations indicate that musharraf era was undoubtly the era that showed most econmic growth with GDP nearly doubling.

only some years of the ayub era can be compared to it.