opinion
Saviour Musharraf
Unlike other takeovers, the general is trying to save democracy, not kill it
emergency in Pakistan
Civil society, intelligentsia and Black Coats stand up to Musharraf; Benazir, the US give him tacit support. Will Pakistan's night be long?
Mariana Baabar
Interview
The former Pak PM on the road ahead: Pervez Musharraf, the Emergency in Pakistan and betrayal in politics.
Neena Gopal
Pakistan
Benazir has the means. But a will to oppose Musharraf...
opinion
The emergency insulates the Pak army—only the militancy will gain from it
Ayesha Siddiqa
Just about everyone in the world is shaking his head and saying, "I told you so. Another dictator has shed his sheep's clothing and emerged as the wolf he really is." This one's name is Pervez Musharraf.

Within hours of his government declaring an emergency in Pakistan, as thousands of lawyers and political activists took to the streets in protest, Britain and the United States both criticised Musharraf severely and announced that they would review their aid programmes to Pakistan. The Dutch government had already suspended its aid. Other EU do-gooders are almost certain to follow suit.

Behind these reactions lie not a love of democracy, but a mixture of wilful blindness, racial and moral condescension that may be the greatest peril that the world faces today.

It has barely taken these governments a blink of an eyelid to conclude that Musharraf has declared an emergency because his skin is in danger. They feel no need to study the choices that Musharraf faced; no need to compare the circumstances of the current declaration of emergency with past such declarations in Pakistan. It is sufficient to remember that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts (Third World dictators in particular) absolutely.

This kneejerk hubris is the greatest obstacle to understanding what Musharraf is facing, and what he is trying to do. Every previous military takeover, with the exception of General Ayub's in 1958, had seen the military form a coalition with the mullahs to pull down the democratic parties. This tacit alliance became overt after General Zia-ul-Haq seized power and turned Pakistan into an Islamic state. So strong did it prove to be that it endured through two more successful assaults on democracy in the eighties and nineties when Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif were ousted from power in successive coups d'etat.

This 'Emergency' is as different from previous military takeovers as chalk from cheese. It has been declared not to cement the alliance with the mullahs but to enable the state to fight them. Since July 15, Pakistan has been in the grip of a civil war. It is facing an uprising of fanatical Islamist elements in the Northwest that has already taken 2,514 lives this year. Of these, 1,800 have died in just 103 days since July 15, when the Taliban formally resiled from the Miranshah agreement of September 5, 2006, and Ayman al-Zawahiri put a price on Musharraf's head. Of these, almost 600 have been soldiers and members of the Pakistan Frontier Constabulary. That is a rate of killing in a low intensity conflict that the Indian armed forces have never had to face.

But what is far worse, this civil war is spreading at disconcerting speed from Waziristan and the tribal border belt to settled areas such as Swat, Malakand, Upper Dir and parts of the North West Frontier Province. Militarised mullahs are raising their heads in more and more places, boasting private armies, swearing to wreak vengeance on Musharraf, and thumbing their noses at civilian authority. Musharraf is trying to fight this metastasis of fanaticism, but he is doing so with one hand tied behind his back.

The origins of this civil war lie in Pakistan's involvement in the US' unending, goal-less war in Afghanistan, the rising death toll among civilians and increasingly the US (and increasingly Pakistan) army's remote-control method of fighting the war—a method that does not distinguish between combatants and civilians. The anger this has been generating among young Pakistanis has turned anyone who is prepared to speak out against the killings into a hero. This is being taken advantage of by a new brand of fanatical maulvis, who make the Jamaat-e-Islami look like moderates.

Musharraf may not be doing a very good job of it, but the fight he is fighting, therefore, is not to kill democracy but to save it. For democracy can only flourish when there is a strong civil society upon which its institutions can rely on for support and replenishment. That society has been struggling to be born in Pakistan ever since independence. It has always been distrusted by the military and frequently suppressed. But today the military is on its side. For, the rise of the mullahs will snuff out civil society altogether, and wipe out the preconditions for a return to democracy.

Only a very strong state can fight such a powerful threat. It is only the Indian government which has taken the statesmanlike position of emphasising the need for stability in Pakistan. This is because it is one of the few governments in the world that understands the crisis that the Pakistani state is facing.
emergency in Pakistan
Civil society, intelligentsia and Black Coats stand up to Musharraf; Benazir, the US give him tacit support. Will Pakistan's night be long?
Mariana Baabar
Interview
The former Pak PM on the road ahead: Pervez Musharraf, the Emergency in Pakistan and betrayal in politics.
Neena Gopal
Pakistan
Benazir has the means. But a will to oppose Musharraf...
opinion
The emergency insulates the Pak army—only the militancy will gain from it
Ayesha Siddiqa
 
Daily MailPublished
COLLAPSE COMMENTS :
HAVE YOUR SAY
Nov 15, 2007 12:00 AM
37
Frankly, Prem Shankar Jha is sounding loopy. He should have his head examined.
Narsing Gowd
Secunderabad, India
Nov 15, 2007 12:00 AM
36
I don't know if the Taliban will take control of Pakistan as such, but the effect of it only will be dissolution of Pakistan as a nation. Good for India. We might have some trouble in the process of it's disintegration like doubts about who might have the nukes, but i am sure Pakistan will be nuked and raped entirely if they shoot a nuke at India. I doubt that will happen. Nuking India is not an option. Every ordinary man loves to live(rich or poor, muslim or kaffir) and ordinary Pakistani people must be desiring the same which would motivate them to corner the possible mischievious makers.
chaitanya
chennai, India
Nov 15, 2007 12:00 AM
35
"There is no alternative to this. One can not argue or persuade people like the Taliban. "'

Baba Ganpat ji

I agree hundered percent with you.Pak has nurtured Terrorism for the last three decades.Now the take over by Talibans is becoming a reality .In fact nearly 50 % of the Pakistani terroritory is under Taliban's \Queda's control.
The Islamic terrorism has become a serious danger for whole of the Mankind.

If things are not controlled in Pakistan then there is a real danger of War of Civilisations engulfing the Mankind.It will be tragic as majority of the mankind including majority of the Muslims don't want to go for this madness !

Hope World Leaders understand the gravity of the situation.
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Nov 15, 2007 12:00 AM
34
GHULAM Y FARUKI,
No matter how you put it, you still cannot hide your sympathies for fellow islamic terrorists. When it comes to Modi, you always seem to be in a aggressive mode but when it comes to Islamic terrorism, you seem to be in a very passive and understanding mode. You think you can fool people with your double standards?
True Indian
,,, United States
Nov 15, 2007 12:00 AM
33
Wanna read a great article from a real journalist with high integrity? Here is it. Very realistic and a slap on the face of scoundrals like Jha who is just trying to prop up the rogue general.


http://www.indianexpress.com/story/238378._.html



Jha has been trying for many years to hand over J&K to Pakistan, one way or other.
True Indian
,,, United States
Nov 14, 2007 12:00 AM
32
I disagree with your analysis. Trying to fight terrorists is the ostensible reason that Musharraf has provided since he declared emergency. But all his actions have proved otherwise. He has released a few persons that were charged with abetting terrorism, while dismissing the judicial figures that were threatening his rule. I think one has to look at the ground reality to see the General's real intentions.
Ravi Krishnamoorthy
Sunnyvale, USA
Nov 14, 2007 12:00 AM
31
Hibujas/Bodepudi,

It is morning in Chicago, time to start your anti-Muslim hate campaign!
Ghulam Y Faruki
New York, United States
Nov 14, 2007 12:00 AM
30
Ghai,

>> MUSLIMS in India should understand that without encounters Terrorism can't be elimnated.

This is a strange statement. Mr Aiyar, in his Times Of India article, makes no such wild assertion. In fact his article describes the situation in Punjab in early 1990's and it bears no resemblance to the current terrorist attacks in India. He says, "Sikh militancy continued for years after Bhindranwale's death. Attempts to negotiate with militant groups failed. They infiltrated government services, killed many politicians and cops, and could not be controlled even by the Army. They were aided by Pakistan, but clearly had substantial support among Sikhs too. By 1990, Sikh militants were as powerful as the state. When they ordered shops to close, they were obeyed. When they posted notices to stop the vending of tobacco, liquor and meat, everybody obeyed. Indeed, when they ordered children not to cheat in exams, cheating ended, for the first time ever. But this highhandedness, along with episodes of abduction and rape, antagonised the local population. Militants, once seen as heroes, became resented or dreaded."

The faceless terrorists of today have no such visible presence in India's Mslim community. Mr.Aiyar is correct that the terrorist situation in Pakistan is similar to what happened in Punjab 25 years ago. The ugly Red Mosque episode in Islamabaad made that clear.
Ghulam Y Faruki
New York, United States
Nov 14, 2007 12:00 AM
29
the article is well written but for a single flaw of the author.

After declaration of emergency, how many fanatical mullahs or extremists have been arrested? All we hear about is arrest of opposition politicians,judges,lawyers, students,human right activists; the very people who from the basis of civil society!
Biju Varghese
Mavelikara, India
Nov 14, 2007 12:00 AM
28
Shouldn’t Americans be discussing impact of the present happenings in Pakistan on their country, USA? Even a line or two would suffice.
sohan
rockville, United States
Nov 14, 2007 12:00 AM
27
Disagree but not be disagreeable, one of the attributes of a cultured soul!
No offense meant!
sohan
rockville, United States
Nov 14, 2007 12:00 AM
26
Mush and Pakistanies used to call Kashmiri militants as FREEDOM FIGHTERS .

NOW ??
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Nov 14, 2007 12:00 AM
25
Part Two:
"Ultimately Indira sent in the Army to kill Bhindranwale. But militancy in Punjab continued, and she herself was killed by Sikh militants. So too was Longowal. Both paid for nurturing monsters.

Musharraf and Pakistani politicians face the same risk. Musharraf has already survived several attempts on his life, and Benazir Bhutto has just survived a massive bomb blast. Nawaz Sharif wants to ally with Islamic parties to provide a third alternative, but may find (like Longowal) that this does not guarantee safety.

In India, Sikh militancy continued for years after Bhindranwale's death. Attempts to negotiate with militant groups failed. They infiltrated government services, killed many politicians and cops, and could not be controlled even by the Army. They were aided by Pakistan, but clearly had substantial support among Sikhs too.

By 1990, Sikh militants were as powerful as the state. When they ordered shops to close, they were obeyed. When they posted notices to stop the vending of tobacco, liquor and meat, everybody obeyed. Indeed, when they ordered children not to cheat in exams, cheating ended, for the first time ever.

But this highhandedness, along with episodes of abduction and rape, antagonised the local population. Militants, once seen as heroes, became resented or dreaded.

In 1992, a new Congress CM told police chief KPS Gill to go after the militants, no-holds-barred. Gill used the extra-judicial tactics the militants themselves used. The Punjab police was dominated by Sikh Jats, just as the militants were. The police was incensed by murders of its officers by the militants. Under Gill, it struck back ruthlessly and efficiently. Militancy ended speedily, and its lack of popular support became plain.

Bhindranwale envisaged a religious war in which Sikhs would beat Hindus. His communal warmongering won him Sikh popular support for years. Indira Gandhi regarded the Army assault on the Golden Temple as a secular necessity, but most Sikhs saw it as a religious offence.

Militancy could be quelled only by a change in mindset. This change could not be imposed by the Army, or by President's Rule from New Delhi, both of which could be portrayed as Hindu machinations. The change in mindset occurred when militants became so highhanded that they antagonised fellow Sikhs. This paved the way for Gill's crackdown. What started as a Hindu versus Sikh matter ended only when it became a battle between two sets of Jat Sikhs.

Something similar is needed to end militancy in Pakistan. Americans or other outsiders cannot quell it. Ordinary Pakistanis, who for long have viewed jehadis as freedom fighters, will have to start viewing them as enemies of the state. The process took a decade in Punjab, and will surely take as long in Pakistan. But once that happens, the time will be ripe for a Pakistan equivalent of KPS Gill to end militancy in Pakistan. That outcome is by no means certain, but is what we must hope for"
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Nov 14, 2007 12:00 AM
24
"Pakistan needs its own KPS Gill

Swaminathan S Anklesaria Aiyar ""

WE ALL AGREE .INDIA SHOULD TOO REACTIVATE GILLISM IF WE WANT TO ELIMINATE JEHAD AND TERRORISM IN INDIA.

MUSLIMS in India should understand that without encounters Terrorism can't be elimnated.

"The Congress Party's criticism of Musharraf's Emergency in Pakistan has been very mild. No wonder, since the parallels with Indira Gandhi are so strong.

Musharraf has declared an Emergency to forestall an adverse Supreme Court verdict on the validity of his election. India Gandhi did the same in 1975. The Allahabad High Court held her guilty of electoral malpractice, but allowed her to appeal to the Supreme Court. Rather than risk an adverse verdict, she declared an Emergency on the excuse that the country was in severe turmoil. Musharraf has done the same.

Indira quickly amended the election law to ensure her election could not be invalidated. Musharraf doubtless has something similar in mind.

There are, of course huge differences. Indira was a popular leader whose election was snagged by a technicality. Musharraf is a general who staged a coup and then rigged electoral systems and the judiciary. That is no mere technicality.

Indians should worry less about Musharraf's future than the rise in Islamic militancy in Pakistan. The state has lost control of substantial areas in the North West Frontier Province. Militants captured 250 soldiers, shot a few, and released the rest in return for the release of arrested militants. This did not buy peace. Immediately after, militants captured the town of Matta and its defending soldiers. Thousands of paramilitary forces have deserted rather than fight.

For decades, the Pakistani Army and politicians nurtured Islamic militants, to use them as a tool in Kashmir and Afghanistan. But now, a la Frankenstein, the monster has turned against his creator.

This parallels India's own experience. Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, the Sikh militant, went from strength to strength in the 1980s because both Indira Gandhi and Sant Longowal of the Akali Dal wooed him. Indira backed him against the official Akali candidate in a minor election. Longowal used him to polarise politics along religious lines, hoping to ensure Akali political dominance in Sikh-majority Punjab. Indeed, Longowal let Bhindranwale occupy the Golden Temple and launch a reign of terror from there.""
cntd
a k ghai
mumbai, India
Nov 14, 2007 12:00 AM
23
DMK provided sanctuary to LTTE and India ended up with Rajiv assasinated. Indira Gandhi propped up Bindranwale and was India faced Sikh militancy for a decade. Pakistan propped up the Jihadis and it has come to this.

It is the same phenomenan. When the state gives power to people with guns, they can fully expect to be shot at. It is only a matter of time. In the case of LTTE, it took only a decade for India to sort it out. In the case of Sikh millitants, it took twenty years. Pakistan has ridden this tiger for more than 30 years. It is not going to be easy to dismount now.

To think that Musharraf is the right man to do the job is BS. Any government that comes to power in Islamabad has to deal with the armed religious elements. If they do not do so, then there is a real chance of Pakistan breaking up. Either way, it is advantageous for India to call for Musharrafs removal. A prosperous Pakistan is in India's interest. So is a weak Pakistan. India should work to achieve both ends. More Pakistani businessmen and less Pakistani soldiers on Indian borders.
vijay
Chennai, India
Nov 14, 2007 12:00 AM
22
The biggest smoke screen on Musharraf's 'moderation' is being created by Indians who are the worst sufferers of his continuing and active jihad policy which is now affecting Maldives and Bangladesh too.

Why are Indians so intent on sinking the region into greater conflict and religious radicalism by whitewashing Musharraf's South Asian jihad policy?

XYZ
Los Angeles, USA
Nov 14, 2007 12:00 AM
21

http://www.hindu.com/20...es/2007111461541700.htm


Musharraf promoting civil society and moderation:

MALE (MALDIVES): An Islamist cell which executed Maldives’ first-ever terror strike had connections with Lashkar-e-Taiba operatives in India, investigators have discovered.

Moosa Inas, a Laamu atoll resident charged with having triggered the explosive device which went off in Male’s Sultan Park on September 29, had travelled to Thiruvananthapuram in December 2005. Inas arrived in Kerala on a flight through Colombo, and then crossed the India-Pakistan border at Attari to meet contacts linked to the Jamia Salafiyya in Faisalabad — a seminary that has produced key Lashkar commanders.

Twelve tourists were injured in the explosion, which was executed both to signal Islamist opposition to the government and to cripple the islands’ economy.

Designed using a low-grade explosive, the device was similar in its construction to those which went off recently in Ajmer and Hyderabad, barring a switch to prevent accidental detonation — a response to the high incidence of wrong-number calls in Maldives’ mobile networks.

Maldives authorities say at least 10 key operatives, including computer engineer Abdul Latif Ibrahim and Ali Shameem, have fled to Pakistan. Both were on a watch list of suspects the Maldives government believed were preparing to receive training at Islamist facilities in Pakistan. Inas, however, was deported from Colombo along with another suspect, Ahmed Naseer, before they could catch connecting flights to Karachi.
XYZ
Los Angeles, USA
Nov 14, 2007 12:00 AM
20
It is always lovely to have absolute power if it is in the right and just hands. When Saudi King is tolerated why not tolerate the less obnoxious and more secular Musharraf? I always felt that Indira Gandhi did not know how to make use of her absolute powers. She misused it and demonised.
pear
mumbai, India
Nov 14, 2007 12:00 AM
19
Hibujas/Bodepudi,

>> It's not the numbers-1.5 Billion! It's the QUALITY.

What arrogance! A moron like you is going to judge the quality of a whole community.

>> Does it not prove that such a god is the worst devil and the evil incarnate?

Calling the God of others a devil shows what an unreformed neanderthal base mentality you have. You are not fit to be called a civilized human being.

>> teach the faithful of the horrific genocides committed against Indics.

Genocides have become your stock in trade to keep your hate going. Muslim conquests have not been bloodier than conquests in all six continents over the ages. But you keep repeating your canard to exacerbate community tensions, being the villain that you are.

>> Is it not OBLIGATORY on Muslim brothers to teach the Faithful to STRICTLY FOLLOW one-child norms.

I have told you several times that your whole approach to this problem is idiotic, but you are just not able to see the stupidity of your proposals.

>> do you blame a Modi for not restraining mobs in Gujarat AFTER the unprovoked massacres at Godhra?

This reveals the true you, a hate-filled genocidal maniac.
Ghulam Y Faruki
New York, United States
Nov 14, 2007 12:00 AM
18
Hibujas/Bodepudi,

>> Isn't Fitzerald talking truth when he highlights that Islamists have no loyalties to the nation states they live in-other than to the nation of Islam?

Tell this to the families of Indian Muslim soldiers who have died in the service of their country. It is rats like you who show no loyalty to any cause other than your "Hate-Muslims" agenda which you have made your life's ignoble mission. What a disgrace!
Ghulam Y Faruki
New York, United States
Nov 14, 2007 12:00 AM
17
To Hibujas.
Friend! There are 1.5 billion Muslims. Now you yourself know that there are many who are eduacted and cultured.Why this...have they visited....of course.
To Prem Shankar Jha.
With due respect to your knowledge,experience and insight, Sir, you have missed a point. This induction of fanatical Islamic movements began under Zia ul Haq and his hand maiden was none other than Musharraf. Today if he is fighting them ,it is because the chickens have come home to roost.He has sown evil and now faces the whirlwind of evil. Back to the eternal truth...'Jaise Karam karega Waise Phal Dega Bhagwan.'
Azeem Taqi
Nashville, United States
Nov 14, 2007 12:00 AM
16
Hibujas/Bodepudi,

>> Have you seen Muslims visiting the rude bridge in Concord or Gettysburg, or any sites having to do with American history?

Idiot, I told you before that I and several of my friends have visited these sights more than once. Repeatedly pasting the same anti-Muslim hate messages in this forum, all to insult India's second biggest community, is proof of your lowly anti-national bent. All you want is worseing of communal disharmony.
Ghulam Y Faruki
New York, United States
Nov 14, 2007 12:00 AM
15
"The judiciary has never opined on his term as Army Chief."
Perhaps it has, in context of his President post. But the point remains that the judiciary was never called upon to declare him unfit to be Army Chief.
XYZ
Los Angeles, USA
Nov 14, 2007 12:00 AM
14
reply part II
"The origins of this civil war lie in Pakistan's involvement in the US' unending, goal-less war in Afghanistan"

On the contrary, this civil war is fuelled by the contradictions of Musharraf's two-faced policy since 9/11, namely to offer overt support to NATO's peacekeeping in Afghanistan while denying all responsibility for Taliban elements fighting those NATO forces from Pakistani territory. The US pays Musharraf to fight these elements but Pak Army wants to let sleeping dogs lie and fighting dogs fight while awaiting the day NATO finds the military losses too heavy to bear and leaves.

"Pakistan army's remote-control method of fighting the war—a method that does not distinguish between combatants and civilians"

Your point is valid. Till recently, the tribal areas were subjected to British era collective justice system where the entire tribe was punished for the transgressions of a few. The punishment could be even aerial bombing. Since the advent of Taliban fighters, the tribal system has broken down and the Taliban have killed the tribal elders. So collective punishment by indiscriminate bombing of areas belonging to erring tribes no longer works. It only punishes even kills people who are already helpless in holding their armed Taliban neighbours accountable.

Even a layman civilian reader of your column like myself knows this, BUT THE PAKISTANI ARMY DOESN'T KNOW ITS BOMBING POLICY IS FLAWED AND INEFFECTIVE?.

Could it just be Mr. Jha, that the Pakistani Army is bombing its own civilians in FATA to present a fraud of fighting the Taliban there, to quote death tolls to the Americans and leave the Taliban intact? Musharraf has backed mass murderers in J&K for years, he can do such a cynical thing without a blink in 'national interest'.

"For democracy can only flourish when there is a strong civil society, today the military is on its side."

Musharraf is jailing civil society and releasing the extremists. After proclaiming emergency, Musharraf arrested Asma Jahangir and released "Mullah Obaidullah Akhund—one of Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar's closest confidants and his defense minister until the post 9-11 invasion of Afghanistan".(Newsweek)

Mr Jha, please ponder is this how you would advise Musharraf to foster civil society and fight fanatical Islamists, by arresting the former and releasing the latter?
XYZ
Los Angeles, USA
Nov 14, 2007 12:00 AM
13
reply part 1
Mr Jha
" They feel no need to study the choices that Musharraf faced;"


Well, the world is taking Musharraf's own word for the real reason. He said that he declared emergency because the Supreme Court was going to rule against his re-election as President.

The judiciary has never opined on his term as Army Chief. He could have saved democracy by appointing a confidant like his wife or Shaukat Aziz as President and continued himself as Army Chief The Supreme Court judgement against him would have been reason enough for everyone including the US and the Pak Army to accept the arrangement quietly.

" It has been declared not to cement the alliance with the mullahs but to enable the state to fight them. "But what is far worse, this civil war is spreading at disconcerting speed... Militarised mullahs are raising their heads in more and more places, boasting private armies, swearing to wreak vengeance on Musharraf, and thumbing their noses at civilian authority.


How was this crisis precipitated? The Lal Masjid clerics and Fazlullah were allowed to grandstand and threaten violence against the state for months if not years. The Chief Justice was manhandled, activist lawyers were beaten mercilessly, Asma Jahangir and Aitzaz Ahsan were arrested in a few minutes; dissenting Supreme Court judges put under house arrest in a few hours; protesting lawyers have been charged with treason; mainstream cable TV stations shut down and their equipment seized;

YET YET in stark contrast these former mujahiddeen clients the Ghazi brothers and Fazlullah of Swat were granted months even years to propagate their challenges to the state in the press, TV and radio; to accumulate deadly weapons, to kidnap and behead civilians and soldiers and a procession of government officials granted their demands whereupon they demanded even more. Why? Have treason charges been filed against these former mujahiddeen clients of the ISI even today?

Why did Musharraf practically foster these conflicts if he is interested in fighting fanatical Islamist elements? Answer: Musharraf is not interested in fighting fanatical Islamist elements because it means abandoning the Afghanistan and Kashmir jihad policy which he kept alive since 9/11 by keeping Afghan Taliban leadership and Pakistani jihadi leadership under wraps on Pakistani soil. Taking American largesse was not a sign of end of jihad policy.

XYZ
Los Angeles, USA
Nov 14, 2007 12:00 AM
12
Pakistan under Musharraf, though he denies it, is a sponsor of terrorism on the soil of India, and, therefore, it would make Indians ecstatic to see him dethroned. It would be a day of deliverance!

Pakistan under Taliban, on the other hand, would legalize terrorism, especially, against India and would encourage the terrorists to operate with heightened intensity. India is a nation of brave and mighty, but fighting against them would be costlier than what it is today.

Musharraf, even, at his worst is, still, a better bet for India than Talibans would be.
sohan
rockville, United States
Nov 14, 2007 12:00 AM
11
Ganesan >>
"To that end, we must make sure that Pak remains boiling"

I agree. But boiling generally leads to spill over. We have to watch out for that.
chester pester
timbaktoo, timbaktoo
Nov 13, 2007 12:00 AM
10
This MSNBC article is a direct spit on the face of this rascal Jha.

Mr. Jha, please go and wash your mouth because it stinks with all those b*jobs you have giving to Pakis for years. Also, you need to come into the Hindu fold to clean your mind and soul.

Even Musharaaf advisers admitted that he imposed emergency to save himself from a likely adverse ruling from the supreme court that he is ineligible to run for another term.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21763449/



True Indian
,,, United States
Nov 13, 2007 12:00 AM
9
This is a great insight into what really is going on now in Pakistan.The West,especially its liberal media,is blind to the history of Pakistan and regards Musharraf as if he were a typical South American dictator of yesteryears.They don't grasp the nuances of the present struggle in that country.No wonder they look upon Benazir Bhutto,an extraordinarily corrupt politician,as a champion of democracy.
Narendra Maganti
Hyderabad, India
Nov 13, 2007 12:00 AM
8
Jhaji .... innovative logic and quite convoluted too ..... to save something (democracy in this case) you first have to kill it.
Arun Maheshwari
Bangalore, India
Nov 13, 2007 12:00 AM
7
For once I agree with Jha. Musharraf is the best thing t oahve happened to Pakistan.
Rajeev
Delhi, India
Nov 13, 2007 12:00 AM
6
"Unstable neighbors on our borders are not good for India"

Yeah right. We know how beneficial has been in having a stable China.

A stable Pakistan will indulge in cross border terrorism more vigorously. The more they have internal problems, the less headache we have.
Ganesan
Nj, USA
Nov 12, 2007 12:00 AM
5
Ganesan,

>> However from the Indian point of view, a stable Pakistan is NOT in India's interest.

Unstable neighbors on our borders are not good for India.
Ghulam Y Faruki
New York, United States
Nov 12, 2007 12:00 AM
4
This guy lost it. It's confirmed. First of all, fighting extremism and terrorism should not be a one man crusade. It should come from the people and the institutions in the govt. and society. This nut case should read this first


http://www.newsweek.com/id/69494


While Mushraaaf is busy arresting human rights activists, secular political leaders, muzzling the media and arresting supreme court judges, he is releasing hardcore terrorist from jails and he wants the world to believe that he is fighting emergency.

Also it is a perverted logic to claim that a stable Pakistan is good for India. Don't you think a stable Pakistan will focus more on sending terrorist into India with money and political power. The right thing for India is to seal it's borders as much as possible (with help from our friends like Israel) and contribute towards the destrcution of a rogue state like Pakistan whose only contribution to the world is terrorism.

As for Jha, I suggest checking into a mental asylum soon.

By the way Mr. Jha, do you have any back up plans in the likely scenario that jihadists will organize a coup against Musharaaf and get control of their nuclear weapons? If you don't, you better plan it right now. These jihadists are some crazy, barbaric and inhuman people. They will definetly use it against India. All your balls lick*ng service done to Pakistan will be of no use when that time comes.
True Indian
,,, United States
Nov 12, 2007 12:00 AM
3
For the first time in many years, Jha makes a credible argument. However from the Indian point of view, a stable Pakistan is NOT in India's interest. To that end, we must make sure that Pak remains boiling. To "understand" and "appreciate" Mush's concerns is none of our business.
Ganesan
Nj, USA
Nov 12, 2007 12:00 AM
2
Mr Jha,
Keep your fuc.... opions to yourself. You think the people who are demanding the right to express themselves are sheilding terrorists, some of them are your own counterparts (journalists), lawyers, citizens and you think that your thinking about Musharaf carries more weight than them. Agreed that Army and ISI created this nuisance but as per your logic, Musharaf holds the key to this problem does not go down any 1's throat. You think one who created those leagues will destroy them, no way. People of pakistan know that he is just trying trying to create another excuse to cling on to the tile of COAS and President, the only combination of power which can make him live and rule over the people.

Mr. Jha, before writing and expressing things, for god sake sake THINK and write. Kagaz kaley kar key apna Julus mat nikalo. People reserve the right to chose Hitler or Gandhi, as we have seen in the past. I am wondering if you were in pakistan and you were dragged and your ass kicked, had you been thinking the same way? Or is outlook paying back to Musharraf for his breakfar in Agra, where he insulted us by leaving midway as if we were untouchables. And OUTLOOK has this habbit of licking powerful people who trash Indians.
Jatinder
Vancouver, Canada
Nov 12, 2007 12:00 AM
1
Jha has lost it. Call in the strait jackets.
Biswapriya Purkayastha
Shillong, India
COLLAPSE COMMENTS   
Post a Comment
You are not logged in, please log in or register
ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SUBSCRIBE | ADVERTISING RATES | COPYRIGHT & DISCLAIMER | COMMENTS POLICY