Gilani, the current Pakistani prime Minister set himself a benchmark of a 100 days to check upon his own promises and the progress his government made...
That time is here and now and the critics are drawing their own conclusions from whatever has come about in these 100 days.
Associated press sees the current governement in disarray after breaking of PPPs coalition with Muslim League(N). The sentiments are not a whole lot different locally from how they're being seen by the global media. Dawn, the highest circulating newspaper in pakistan relates that, "Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani made in his 100-day agenda was overshadowed by more spectacular political and administrative failures and seemingly unending economic hardships."
Radio Australia sites multiple factors that have hindered in the stable running or affairs in pakistan, Militency, economy and ruling coalitions dispute over Musharraf and judiciary to name just the most highlighted ones.
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Aitzaz Ahsan: U.S. Silent About Ousted Judge in Pakistan
Originally posted at blog.simplejustice.us on below link...
Aitzaz Ahsan: U.S. Silent About Ousted Judge in Pakistan
Posted by SHG at 7/3/2008 5:36 AM and is filed under uncategorized
At the request of the New York City Bar, I announced the relatively impromptu talk by Aitzaz Ahsan, leader of the Pakistani lawyers revolt stemming from the ouster of the Chief Justice of their Supreme Court. I figure the least I could do is close the loop.While lawyers around the country protested for a day after Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf put an end to the rule of law in our ally, most of us went back to work afterward and didn't give it a second thought. After all, it's so much more interesting to talk about going to war for "freedom" than getting one's hands dirty in the actual nitty-gritty of it, especially when it's our own ally who's taking it away, America's silence.This was Ahsan's point, as related in this New York Lawyers Article.
In a breakfast talk yesterday at the New York City Bar Association, Aitzaz Ahsan, the president of the Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan, criticized the White House for not speaking "a word, a syllable" to protest the five-month house arrest of Pakistan's chief justice, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. Mr. Ahsan said the administration had been silent because it "does not want to embarrass" Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf. Mr. Ahsan added that the silence is "noticed in Pakistan" and is "a tragedy in the larger context and canvas of Pakistan's place in the world."Without the reinstatement of the ousted judges and the return of the rule of law, Mr. Ahsan said, the "broad masses" in Pakistan are without "enforceable rights."In that environment, he asserted, "extremists will encroach upon the middle ground," leaving as vulnerable a front-line state in the war against terror.
Kinda makes you feel all warm and fuzzy about the loss of American lives so far away for the cause of freedom.Ahsan said that the lawyers of Pakistan recognized the protests by American lawyers and appreciated their efforts.
To keep up the pressure to reinstate the judges, Mr. Ahsan told the 120 lawyers who attended yesterday's 70-minute session that lawyer groups in Pakistan are calling for an international convention in September.He said he hoped "distinguished attorneys" from around the world and the "elected representatives" of bar associations would attend to hear first-hand accounts of Chief Justice Chaudhry and other ousted judges.
This is the flat world of the law, and while we espouse civil rights and freedoms for ourselves, will we care as much when it's about it in Pakistan? Bear in mind, there may come a day when we need the favor returned.
Aitzaz Ahsan: U.S. Silent About Ousted Judge in Pakistan
Posted by SHG at 7/3/2008 5:36 AM and is filed under uncategorized
At the request of the New York City Bar, I announced the relatively impromptu talk by Aitzaz Ahsan, leader of the Pakistani lawyers revolt stemming from the ouster of the Chief Justice of their Supreme Court. I figure the least I could do is close the loop.While lawyers around the country protested for a day after Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf put an end to the rule of law in our ally, most of us went back to work afterward and didn't give it a second thought. After all, it's so much more interesting to talk about going to war for "freedom" than getting one's hands dirty in the actual nitty-gritty of it, especially when it's our own ally who's taking it away, America's silence.This was Ahsan's point, as related in this New York Lawyers Article.
In a breakfast talk yesterday at the New York City Bar Association, Aitzaz Ahsan, the president of the Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan, criticized the White House for not speaking "a word, a syllable" to protest the five-month house arrest of Pakistan's chief justice, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. Mr. Ahsan said the administration had been silent because it "does not want to embarrass" Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf. Mr. Ahsan added that the silence is "noticed in Pakistan" and is "a tragedy in the larger context and canvas of Pakistan's place in the world."Without the reinstatement of the ousted judges and the return of the rule of law, Mr. Ahsan said, the "broad masses" in Pakistan are without "enforceable rights."In that environment, he asserted, "extremists will encroach upon the middle ground," leaving as vulnerable a front-line state in the war against terror.
Kinda makes you feel all warm and fuzzy about the loss of American lives so far away for the cause of freedom.Ahsan said that the lawyers of Pakistan recognized the protests by American lawyers and appreciated their efforts.
To keep up the pressure to reinstate the judges, Mr. Ahsan told the 120 lawyers who attended yesterday's 70-minute session that lawyer groups in Pakistan are calling for an international convention in September.He said he hoped "distinguished attorneys" from around the world and the "elected representatives" of bar associations would attend to hear first-hand accounts of Chief Justice Chaudhry and other ousted judges.
This is the flat world of the law, and while we espouse civil rights and freedoms for ourselves, will we care as much when it's about it in Pakistan? Bear in mind, there may come a day when we need the favor returned.
Interesting facts about Emergency 2007
Facts documenting political developments starting on November 3, 2007 and the social, economic, and other ramifications compiled at wikia in the link below.
2007 State of Emergency in Pakistan
2007 State of Emergency in Pakistan
Zardari wants Musharraf to remain in office
Expert Peninsula On-line, Qatar
Source ::: Internews
LONDON • It is not the US but Asif Ali Zardari who wants to see President Pervez Musharraf continue in his office and Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry remains out of his, an analyst has said.
Fareed Zakaria, editor of ‘Newsweek International’, while participating in a wide-ranging discussion stated this after he had introduced his new book, ‘The Post-American World’ at the Foreign Press Association here.
He was asked why the US was blocking the restoration of the illegally deposed judiciary and hindering the new coalition government’s efforts to send President Musharraf home.
Answering the first part of the query, he said: “It is because the US believes the only stability outside the military in Pakistan today is the PPP and Zardari has told them he does not want the restoration of judiciary.”
And Zakaria’s response to the second part of the query was: “I don’t think the US cares one way or the other about Musharraf because army chief Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani is somebody it trusts. But the thing is Zardari says the whole structure will collapse if Musharraf went and there would be chaos and you know it could be for very self-interest reasons.”
He said personally he would like to see the chief justice and the 60 judges restored and he thought Musharraf should have receded on his own rather than forced to give up his uniform and other powers.
“As often happens with dictators, General Musharraf at some point stopped being liberal and modernising and engaged in power grab,” he said. In his opinion, Musharraf should not have imposed emergency, he should not have fired the judges, and he should not have replaced the Supreme Court.
Giving his views on the shape of things to come in South Asia in what he called the post-American world, he said he saw a huge shift taking place in the US which was fundamentally to view the region as a much important part of its overall geopolitical strategy. “And that is exactly because of China. The rise of China has suddenly made South Asia a crucial player.”
He thought India and Pakistan needed an interlocutor, a go-between to mediate between them because they did not trust each other and in his opinion the US was in the best position to play that role. “Though at present India does not trust the US and believes it is still tilted towards Pakistan.”
“If you could manage to ease up between India and Pakistan to the point that they could simply trade with one another, it would transform South Asia, transform Pakistan which today is locked out of this huge economy right next door,” he said.
The analyst said for this to happen, the US needs to play the role of honest broker, but that it could hope to do only if it developed good relations with India. “I am not predicting that it would happen, but what I am saying is it is happy scenario for South Asia.”
Source: Zardari wants Musharraf to remain in office: Expert - Peninsula On-line
Source ::: Internews
LONDON • It is not the US but Asif Ali Zardari who wants to see President Pervez Musharraf continue in his office and Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry remains out of his, an analyst has said.
Fareed Zakaria, editor of ‘Newsweek International’, while participating in a wide-ranging discussion stated this after he had introduced his new book, ‘The Post-American World’ at the Foreign Press Association here.
He was asked why the US was blocking the restoration of the illegally deposed judiciary and hindering the new coalition government’s efforts to send President Musharraf home.
Answering the first part of the query, he said: “It is because the US believes the only stability outside the military in Pakistan today is the PPP and Zardari has told them he does not want the restoration of judiciary.”
And Zakaria’s response to the second part of the query was: “I don’t think the US cares one way or the other about Musharraf because army chief Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani is somebody it trusts. But the thing is Zardari says the whole structure will collapse if Musharraf went and there would be chaos and you know it could be for very self-interest reasons.”
He said personally he would like to see the chief justice and the 60 judges restored and he thought Musharraf should have receded on his own rather than forced to give up his uniform and other powers.
“As often happens with dictators, General Musharraf at some point stopped being liberal and modernising and engaged in power grab,” he said. In his opinion, Musharraf should not have imposed emergency, he should not have fired the judges, and he should not have replaced the Supreme Court.
Giving his views on the shape of things to come in South Asia in what he called the post-American world, he said he saw a huge shift taking place in the US which was fundamentally to view the region as a much important part of its overall geopolitical strategy. “And that is exactly because of China. The rise of China has suddenly made South Asia a crucial player.”
He thought India and Pakistan needed an interlocutor, a go-between to mediate between them because they did not trust each other and in his opinion the US was in the best position to play that role. “Though at present India does not trust the US and believes it is still tilted towards Pakistan.”
“If you could manage to ease up between India and Pakistan to the point that they could simply trade with one another, it would transform South Asia, transform Pakistan which today is locked out of this huge economy right next door,” he said.
The analyst said for this to happen, the US needs to play the role of honest broker, but that it could hope to do only if it developed good relations with India. “I am not predicting that it would happen, but what I am saying is it is happy scenario for South Asia.”
Source: Zardari wants Musharraf to remain in office: Expert - Peninsula On-line
Monday, November 5, 2007
Rumours of Musharraf's arrest.
There are rumours that Musharraf has been escorted and arrested by Ministry of Defence (MOD) there is no way to confirm this since the Media channels have been shut down by Musharraf...
Saturday, November 3, 2007
The More things change the more they remain the same.
Once again the circle of life has come back 360 degrees to the point of Marshall Law/State of Emergency. It used to be every 20 or so years 1958, 1978, 1998 but this time it has come around rather quick for the comfort of the politicians in 2007, even though it ever went away since 1998.Musharraf is expected to Address the nation tonight even though, no official reason has been given so far. The Western media (CNN later reported that Marshall Law has declared) is again quick to give it a terrorrism related spin which they later took off their sites and and now is speculating about the Concerns of 'Lawlessness and and political instability' but we know fully well that it's an old trick out of one of his infamous hats to extend his own Rule. The Chief justice has aparently been arrested and the media suspended.
Ah.... what else is new... seems like Pakistan has a way of digging themselves a hole time and again. It;s throughly depressing to see this happen specially with a figure head who has time and again denied such intentions.This jsut goes to show how easy it is to use the military muscle and use it to your advantage when a military ruler is in power... A democratic government would have had to go through major hurdles to impose anything like this. All a dictator has to do is ask his troops to move in and take control of everything.
Then again it's not all that depressing knowing Pakistan's history.. knowing fully well that more the things change, more they remain the same. Pakistan has seen this far too often and the life has still continued. People here have found a way to disconnect themselves from the political drama and carry on with their normal lives... Sure, every slightest political move is discussed in details on every corner of every street, cafe, barber's, taxis, work and any other imaginable place where 2 people can congrigate ( as it's bound to happen tonight as Kamal Haider, the reporter for Al-Jazeera describes it a s a 'black day')but... It seems that people are unflatered by all these going ons... after all who would want to raise a voice infront of a man with a gun????
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Beyond the Attacks
Riddle is certianly the right word to define Pakistan's political circumstances - as suggested by Jayshree Bajoria in her article in Council on Foreign relations website. Pakistan has the most diverse group of situations all jumbled into absolute caos. It's hard to believe that the country is still able to function with all these shortcomings and with the presence of many potentially dangerous elements that could spin the situation out of control at any given moment.
The existance of anti west, stubborn groups that are willing to go violent is hard enough for western powers to swollow. Add to it, the existance of neuclear capability of any sort alongwith corrupt admisitration, makes any western leader shiver in their dreams.
And if that's not enough, there's political instability in shape of corrupt political parties who have all had some share of power at least once and will do anything to get it back - hostile neighbours (not just India) that would take any oppertunity to undermine whatever stability pakistan does have - Military dictatorship, that west seems to have come into terms with but thinks it's not bearing fruits any more - and the world renowned secret services that are out of control.
More recently an independent private digital media and rejuvinated judiciary and Courts0 have also entered the mix to make it even more complicated and out of control.
Even though most western newspapers and magazines focus on the War on Terror and any violent attempt is attributed to the Islamists, Taliban or Al-Qaeda (NewsWeek)- like Attacks on Benazir Bhutto (BBC News) that clearly have footprints of internal power struggle than Al-Qaeda. Benazir also endorsed this in her letter to President naming people that are either part of the government, had a hand in setting up corruption cases against her, or the ex-ISI cheif who she's had a personal vandetta with for a while. Even though the war on terror has a very little direct impact internally yet it does have indirect implications. In the war on terror general public opinion inclines more towards anti western sentiment for supposedly dragging pakistan into this war by indirect threats than the sympathy towards western need to engage in this war.
The existance of anti west, stubborn groups that are willing to go violent is hard enough for western powers to swollow. Add to it, the existance of neuclear capability of any sort alongwith corrupt admisitration, makes any western leader shiver in their dreams.
And if that's not enough, there's political instability in shape of corrupt political parties who have all had some share of power at least once and will do anything to get it back - hostile neighbours (not just India) that would take any oppertunity to undermine whatever stability pakistan does have - Military dictatorship, that west seems to have come into terms with but thinks it's not bearing fruits any more - and the world renowned secret services that are out of control.
More recently an independent private digital media and rejuvinated judiciary and Courts0 have also entered the mix to make it even more complicated and out of control.
Even though most western newspapers and magazines focus on the War on Terror and any violent attempt is attributed to the Islamists, Taliban or Al-Qaeda (NewsWeek)- like Attacks on Benazir Bhutto (BBC News) that clearly have footprints of internal power struggle than Al-Qaeda. Benazir also endorsed this in her letter to President naming people that are either part of the government, had a hand in setting up corruption cases against her, or the ex-ISI cheif who she's had a personal vandetta with for a while. Even though the war on terror has a very little direct impact internally yet it does have indirect implications. In the war on terror general public opinion inclines more towards anti western sentiment for supposedly dragging pakistan into this war by indirect threats than the sympathy towards western need to engage in this war.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
