Search
 
Write
 
Forums
 
Login
"Let there arise out of you a band of people inviting to all that is good enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong; they are the ones to attain felicity".
(surah Al-Imran,ayat-104)
Image Not found for user
User Name: abdulruff
Full Name: Dr.Abdul Ruff Colachal
User since: 15/Mar/2008
No Of voices: 1852
 
 Views: 2290   
 Replies: 0   
 Share with Friend  
 Post Comment  
 

Pakistan Politics after Musharraf: Time to Free Kashmir from Indian Yoke 

 

   

A civilian president is all set to take over presidency shortly in Pakistan. Dictatorship generally used to defame any leader whom the strong global forces fear or hate, was accorded by anti-Islamic forces and their media to Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein when the USA finally decided to remove him from power and kill him. The same strategy was being used now to totally remove any sympathy towards Pervez Musharraf, a military leader turned an unusual politician, who sought to introduce democratic norms only to see himself removed from power.

 

Indian media deriving a lot of sadistic pleasure out the domestic turmoil in Pakistan has also quickly branded Musharraf a dictator, where as until recently India claimed he was a strong pillar of emerging Pakistan-India cross-border-trade. While Indian leaders and media keep throwing mud on Pakistan , Kashmir and Bangladesh, Pakistan and others did shy away form making imperialist India unhappy. That is the key trouble with Muslims appeasing India and it anti-Islamic system in the region.  

  

Dictatorship does not bother about freedom of press and people, but cut only limited freedom even during the brief emergency he had to declare, but president Musharraf allowed as much freedom as the circumstances warranted. Faced with multi-pronged designs to destabilize Pakistan, General President Pervez Musharraf shed both his uniform and presidency. Code-mixing is not good for any form of government, some specialists seem to ague, and this is reality no dictator is expected to do, but General Musharraf did and fell. Whether or not his contribution will add to the progress of Pakistan, or not, one has to watch. 

 

ONE


General President Pervez Musharraf first shed his uniform and then presidency, of course under tremendous pressure but not out of fear of facing impeachment that would have considerably reduced his powers. Since he quit without waiting for the parliamentary impeachment, many specialists argued that he was afraid of impeachment and that military refused to support him and hence he did the anti-climax in Pakistan's contemporary politics, thereby leaving a field wide open for further manipulations by the politicians vying for presidency and power. Musharraf announced his decision in a nationally televised public address 11 days after leaders of the two ruling parties said they would proceed with his impeachment. Demands for his resignation became increasingly vocal after
Pakistan's four provincial assemblies voted overwhelmingly for his ouster. In the hour-long address, Musharraf struck a defiant and emotional tone, saying that opponents had opted for the politics of confrontation over reconciliation. He said he would step down in the interest of maintaining stability in Pakistan. "I am leaving with the satisfaction that whatever I could do for this country I did it with integrity," Musharraf said. 

 

 

Musharraf quit presidency in spite of military backing for whatever he would have done. Musharraf negotiated with Zardari regime immunity from civil and criminal prosecution for events during his rule, assurances that smoothed his resignation.  It was effectively rumored around the world, particularly in India, likely that Musharraf, who took power in a bloodless 1999 military coup, would soon leave the country, possibly to live in the Persian Gulf emirate of Dubai or Saudi kingdom or UK. Musharraf's exit, facilitated by an immunity agreement, appeared to augur a new rapport between the country's newly elected civilian government and the powerful military, but the contours of that will be clear only when Zardari assumes power. But the departure of a man who closely allied himself with the USA in anti-terrorism operations opens the question of how his successor will work with Washington and confront the growing insurgency within Pakistan's borders. 

 

 

 

Both PPP Chief Asif Ali Zardari and Pakistan premier PML-N leader Sharif hailed the exit of Musharraf as people's victory. Politicians began marathon meetings about possible replacements for Musharraf, with early reports suggesting a woman might be chosen. As word of the resignation spread, Musharraf's opponents celebrated with cakes in some places, gunfire in others. In Islamabad, the capital, news of Musharraf's departure was greeted with jubilation. People flocked to sweets shops in the city's popular Jinnah Supermarket to buy cakes and pastries to celebrate. A 32-year-old homemaker, as if she knows what exactly democracy is all about said: "It's the dawn of democracy" Leaders of the ruling Pakistan People's Party and Pakistan Muslim League-N party hailed the resignation. "This is a victory for democratic forces," neo-democrats argued. 

 

The "specialists" might still say Musharraf was afraid of military and hence he resigned. But the scene after his departure is not beaming in Pakistan. Both economy and security became subject of concern. Financial markets rebounded. With the country's economy at an all-time low and a radical Islamist insurgency based in the country's tribal areas gaining in strength, the civilian coalition faces challenges that will not be easily or quickly sorted out. Musharraf's resignation and the race to replace him come amid a prolonged battle with Islamic "militants who have carried out suicide bombings and fighting on the Afghan border of nuclear-armed Pakistan.


  TWO

 

 

 

Former Pakistani President Musharraf's resignation on Aug. 18 signaled the beginning of a new round of political uncertainty as the country's civilian government tries to reshape the legacy of nearly nine years of military rule. After Musharraf's departure, the coalition began to collapse. The fragile coalition government comprising the PPP, now led by Zardari, and the party of another former prime minister, Nawaz Sharif, is at loggerheads over how to reinstate dozens of judges sacked by Musharraf last year. Sharif has said that he had allied with Zardari to steer the country of the crisis (read dictatorship) and added that the latter had betrayed him by not reinstating the dismissed judges. Finally, the PML-N chief split from the ruling coalition after accusing Zardari of reneging on several agreements to reinstate dozens of judges deposed by former President Pervez Musharraf during last year's emergency rule. 

 

Zardari has moved in to the PM's lodging in anticipation and is waiting to move eventually into presidential palace soon. Factually speaking, he would not have even dreamt of it even during Benazir's time, but Asif Ali Zardari, the widower of assassinated former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, is all set to win the September 6 vote by legislators for a replacement for Pervez Musharraf.

 

Pakistan's presidential election next week will be a three-way tussle between the country's main parties after the Election Commission on Saturday issued a final list of candidates. Zardari's main rival for president is Saeeduzzaman Siddiqui, a former chief justice nominated by the party of former Prime Minister Sharif. Mushahid Hussain Sayed, a former government minister and top official of the main pro-Musharraf party, is the third candidate. Sayed said that Zardari should withdraw as a candidate because of questions about his mental health and past corruption charges, none of which were ever proved. But Zardari stood firm and now elected president. Members of the country's four provincial assemblies and two houses of the national parliament elect the president and that is Zardari.


THREE: Why Musharraf resigned gracefully?  

 

 

Yes, the most critical question is why Musharraf quit after determinately stating he would face impeachment and every specialist on Pakistan seems to have overlooked one most important issue. The Kashmir turmoil! The historical cultural, political and economic bonds between Kashmiris and Pakistanis require n elucidation and substantiation when both Pakistanis and Kashmiris fought together against hegemonic Indians twice. India knows Kashmiris long for Pakistan and they hate Indians. They never consider themselves Indians even after about 60 of terrorist and diplomatic efforts of New Delhi to make them "feel" Indians. Terror no where works on a permanent basis and it did not work for India either; in fact it went against Indian designs.

 

 

Kashmir is backbone of contention between occupier India and Pakistan wanting to resurrect Kashmir to make it a large Kashmir nation to exist independent of both. Over the last couple of years, Indian media in India and Kashmir spread the rumors that Musharraf, basically from Delhi, was somehow siding with India on Kashmir and was diluting the freedom movement of patriotic Kashmiris and India was able to influence Islamabad by invoking "cross-border-terrorism" track.   It was done in a sustained manner by Indian propaganda masters to split Pakistan and Kashmir. Indian media's role has been disastrous even for Indian Muslims, let alone Kashmiris. Innocent Kashmiris have been awfully confused about Pakistan's policy in Kashmir. Coupled with US-led terror war in Pakistan, people of Pakistan have been disgusted with pro-India over tunes of Musharraf's administration.  

 

Since he quit without waiting for the parliamentary impeachment, many specialists argued that Musharraf was afraid of impeachment and that military refused to support him and hence he did the anti-climax in Pakistan's contemporary politics, thereby leaving a field wide open for further manipulations by the politicians vying for presidency and power. On the contrary, Musharraf quit presidency in spite of the backing from military establishment for whatever would have done a president. After all, he did maximum for the establishment and General Kayani is his hand-picked former ISI man.

 

Musharraf's exit, facilitated by an immunity agreement, appeared to augur a new rapport between the country's newly elected civilian government and the powerful military. The fact remains that Musharraf's diplomacy was to help reduce tension between the two countries through cross border trade and cultural exchanges, but India has its own agenda of retaining Kashmir under its brutal control and for which it wants Pakistan's approval and support. Hence Musharraf's diplomacy remained weak and India only shamelessly talked about "cross-border-terrorism", while killing Kashmiri Muslims systematically.

 

The political crisis in Pakistan has much to with Kashmir issue. The leaders of Pakistan think without Musharraf and military interference they can help Kashmiris regain their sovereignty stolen by India. In fact the freedom fighting Kashmiris have even welcomed the resignation of Musharraf. In fact, Musharraf was not afraid of appeasement and he said he would face it do the needful accordingly. But he was only gauging the mood of the politicians and he realized that there were not many enthusiasts among the members of Parliament and Assemblies to support him and he would lose the case. Politicians were not interested in compromises and chose confrontation. The outcome of being impeached could have been even more disastrous for Pakistan since a weak president cannot keep the nation together, he knew. In stead of causing further turmoil, Musharraf gave in.  

 

The US threatened to bomb Pakistan back to the Stone Age if Islamabad didn't allow Washington to take command of its military forces and bases, and wage war on Taliban. Musharraf confirmed this threat in his autobiography. The little general gave in with unseemly haste. He quickly rented the Pakistani Army and ISI to the US for $1.1 billion in official annual payments. Musharraf ruled as both army chief and Washington's chief planner in Pakistan. Musharraf sent his soldiers and intelligence agents to fight pro-Taliban Pashtun tribesmen along Pakistan's northwestern frontier, and allowed the US to use Pakistan airbases and supply depots. Without these bases, the US and its NATO allies could not have waged war in Afghanistan. Thousands of Pakistani civilians, most of them Pashtun tribesmen, were killed by armed forces. All this he did to appease the US strategists, who always used the "terrorism" plank to further threaten him. The domestic pressure was also used by USA to push Musharraf to make never ending compromises. As a result, an Islamic Pakistan became a weak anti-Muslim state killing Muslims and handing over many to the anti-Islamic US terror forces.  

 

USA might have asked him to step down, but they deny any role. The embattled Musharraf angered his countrymen by siding with the USA and killing Muslims in the country. Even the Lal Mosque tragedy perhaps occurred at the behest of both USA and China since Chinese women were also involved in the incident. But Musharraf, though killing Muslims regularly, "disappointed" Washington by failing to be tougher with al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Pakistan's lawless northwest border region. A few Americans also say it was Musharraf's "dictator"-like actions that eventually unraveled his nearly decade-long rule.

 

One does not know if Musharraf resigned on the advice of the Bush administration. Speculative exercise over the future of US-Pakistan ties would not reward any useful insights into that domain immediately. It is not clear now if the US was involved in any discussion about bringing Musharraf back in some other form. And the departure of a man who closely allied himself with the USA in anti-terrorism operations opens the question of how his successor will work with Washington and confront the growing insurgency within Pakistan's borders.  Musharraf lost his ground because of USA. When he first overthrew the then prime minister Sharif, Musharraf had some popularity. US-led terror war stood against his popularity over time. Over 80 per cent of Pakistanis came to detest Musharraf, even branding him a "traitor" and American agent for selling out his nation's national interests in Afghanistan and Kashmir. Musharraf was accused of handing over up to 1,000 Pakistanis to CIA, all of whom have vanished.

 

To put it in nut-shell, India is the route cause of all Pakistan's problems as ill-focused on Pakistan, it hatched subversive strategies one after another in order to keep Kashmir under its terrorist control mechanisms and Musharraf, who has the backing of the military establishment still preferred to step down leaving Pakistan for reaching stability. He pledged support for democratic reforms in Pakistan, but before he could complete his mission he is forced out. He worked and quit for Pakistan's sake. Only time will tell the rationale of his exit.

 

An Observation

 

Zardari is the new President of Pakistan and that would set at rest the first phase of confusions as to what will be next after Musharraf's resignation. But the next phase will begin sooner than later as the Pakistan's problems were not the creation of one General Musharraf alone. PMLN chief Sharif has made his mind clear about clipping the sweeping powers of President, but Zardari is keen to retain all powers that Musharraf had.

 

Annoyed with Pakistan's pro-India policies against Indian anti-Pakistani containments strategies, disgusted with pro-India politicians and disappointed even with freedom fighting Kashmiri leaders, people of Kashmir took to street against malicious Indian designs against Kashmiris, the illegal Amarnath land deal and then guided by their patriotic leaders undertook the historical March to Muzaffarabad. Kashmiris have spurned the illegal and anti-Kashmiri land deal, asked the occupying Indians to quit Kashmir. Kashmiris want freedom from the arrogant, terrorist India. And Pakistanis are equally perturbed by the turn of events in their cultural neighbor Kashmir. All this anger took Pakistanis to make Musharraf comprehend the nature of serious crisis in the region.

 

Musharraf resigned on 18 August to avoid any melting situation that would endanger the nation more severely than now and further complicate the life of ordinary Pakistanis. It is said he resigned because of a messianic drive and avoid any new turmoil and less on account of an impeachment by the Pakistan People's Party-led ruling coalition. He is keen to see an independent Kashmir to emerge in the near future.

 

With the president gone and a new incumbent in the name of Zardari has been found to occupy the highest seat of Pakistan's power, now the chair of premier would be the focus of the politician. It is quite certain Sharif is not at all interested in becoming the premier again, at least under the present circumstances and so Gilani has no reason to feel any threat to his position. However, for Indian strategists, Gilani should leave and let Sharif or any body else should become the premier there. Why?  Very simple! Indians are obsessed with numbers, colors, names and other such funny omens, signs and symbols. Kashmir has remained the most important problem for New Delhi and Geelani is seen as "trouble-shooter" Indian fanatics and anti-Muslim media, afraid of his power, funnily call him "poison and snake", India wants to see Gilani out of the scene as well so that Kashmiris could be taught few more bloody lessons militarily. If Pakistan's Gilani is out, Kashmiri Geelani also would be forced to leave the scene by a proxy war and the Kashmir freedom fighting struggle should not find any quick resolution in the near future, that way. Recent assassination bid on premier Gilani could have made good feelings in New Delhi. Are the blood thirsty Indian strategists still not smart enough?

 

Days ahead are very crucial for Pakistan's future course of growth and development. Unless Pakistan takes care to address the genuine concerns of the common people, especially of struggling Pakistanis in tribal areas and continue the original programs of Jinnah, there is very little hope for Pakistan's advancements with a deadly anti-Pakistan and anti-Kashmir and anti-Muslim India near by. 

 

Time is ripe for Pakistan to further strengthen the independence movement by gearing up the move to set Kashmir free from Indian yoke by concerted diplomatic efforts, including using its historic relations with USA and its allies. Needless to state Kashmir issue has been lingering around without resolution as an arrogant India is seen plying all possible politics and forms of terrorism, including economic and goods, to silence the freedom seeking Kashmiris - the killed, insulted and injured. 

 

-----------------------

Thank you

Yours Sincerely,

DR.ABDUL RUFF Colachal

Researcher in International Affairs,

South Asia 

Oh, Kashmir!

 

 

Eastern "SwitzerlandKashmir is under siege from India and "paradise" is facing worst food crisis. And it is the strategy of India to punish Kashmiris.  One is not quite sure if New Delhi has, after considering all options on Kashmir issue, finally resolved to grant independence to struggling Kashmiris so as to enable the remaining Kashmiris to live peacefully by forming their own independent government and law. If they have indeed, it is the best option any decent country would choose in place of continued oppression, terrorism and genocide which in turn create problems for the oppressors in India. Economic terrorism and food scarcity unleashed on Kashmiris by Jammu Hindus reveal a mal-intention of New Delhi. People are real power, whether one calls its democracy or autocracy  and this is what Kashmiris have taught to New Delhi which has long forgotten its long war of independence from UK colonialism.

 

The economic terrorism unleashed by  Hindus in Jammu region for Muslims in Kashmir and killings of defenseless innocent Kashmiris have not only caused loss of several thousand crores of rupees, but also created further sense of insecurity for that part of the world and people there think any thing could happen to them any time. Despite government claims that essential commodities are in abundant supplies in the valley, Kashmir is facing acute shortage of food items, edible oil, baby products and medicines, especially during this month of Ramadan fasting. Traders alleged that bulk of the supplies reaching Kashmir is being transported to army and Ladakh by the authorities.

 

India has been trying all forms of oppression of Kashmiris before it surrenders sovereignty back to them. Why?  Death and torture are nothing new to the Kashmiris and they have endured pains so far.  Now supplies to Jammu, Army and Ladakh have been normal and it has not affected the goods in Kashmir. Kashmiris have not received the food items, cereals, milk, edible oil and other products since past one month and shops have almost emptied. Most of commodities currently sold were stocked earlier. There are reports of shortage of commodities is being felt because the supplies reaching Kashmir are being diverted to army and Ladakh. The rations depots in various parts of north, south and Central Kashmir are running out of stocks. Kerosene oil, flour, rice and sugar are not available in majority of our ration depots. Is it a government or a terrorist organization?

 

Unless India declared independence for Kashmir, it should try not to economically harm the Kashmiris who have already suffered enough and lost thousand of innocent lives. Kashmiris have no food stuff and other essentials. Demand and supply is the basis of capitalism, but Manmohan has badly failed to apply this logic in Kashmir. Majority of the traders alleged that government is boasting number of supply trucks by adding civilian trucks hired by the army for transportation of materials. The Kashmir Chamber of Commerce and Industries admitted that there is acute shortage of supplies in Kashmir. The Valley is currently facing shortage of all essential commodities including food items, edible oil, life saving drugs, baby products and all type of machine goods.

 

Tell, Mr. Governor, is this democratic and secular way of functioning? Why do you punish the freedom seeking defenseless Kashmiris collectively? After creating hell for Kashmiris Muslims in Srinagar area, Hindus in Jammu are enjoying life now; they are not all affected. Military and other security service personnel and their families in Kashmir don't suffer, but they only make Kashmiri Muslims suffer. Why Kashmiri Muslims alone should suffer? Are Kashmiri Muslims not humans, deserving basic dignity and essentials of life? Such inhuman and nefarious behaviors of India towards Kashmiris are nothing but criminally obnoxious! Are there no human activists in India to take up this crude and cruel issue of collective punishment of Kashmiris by an essentially terrorist India with UN and other international bodies so that a UN peace mission is put in place in Kashmir before India transfers sovereignty back to Kashmiris? Once sovereignty is surrendered by occupying India to Kashmiris, they will have freedom to take care of themselves.

 

-----------------------

Thank you
Yours Sincerely,
DR.ABDUL RUFF Colachal
Researcher in International Affairs,
South Asia
 No replies/comments found for this voice 
Please send your suggestion/submission to webmaster@makePakistanBetter.com
Long Live Islam and Pakistan
Site is best viewed at 1280*800 resolution