First of all, if you've missed me, I'm terribly sorry. I've had a lot on my plate of late. But I simply couldn't let Musharraf off the hook any more. He needs a nice little verbal whipping from yours truly, then maybe he'll stop his shenanigans.
For those of you who live underneath gigantic rocks without wireless connections, I will briefly sum up the situation. Pervez Musharraf is the military leader of Pakistan, but he is so much more than that! He is also one of America's staunchest allies in the War on Terror! He has struggled to do this in the face of a myriad of Islamic groups who have gained power since he took office, including the Taliban, who have regrouped in western Pakistan. By the same token, we've somehow managed to justify working with a guy who has always been a step away from being a military dictator.
But this cozy state of affairs is rather strained of late, with Musharraf having declared a "state of emergency" in Pakistan and disbanding the Supreme Court (which, coincidentally, was in the middle of a case that would decide whether Musharraf was eligible to run for president again). He has also placed the leader of the opposition, Benazir Bhutto, under house arrest for organizing a protest march. The charge, Musharraf claimed, was that she was "disturbing the peace." Meanwhile, thousands of other opposition members have been jailed.
What's the United States reaction? We send an official envoy. I know, I was scared too! We brought out our big guns!
Predictably, Musharraf gave no indication of when the state of emergency would end, having refused outright some days earlier to give a time when it would be lifted. In an interview, the general said that the purpose was to make sure that the upcoming elections went smoothly.
You know, to be perfectly honest, he may have an idea there. There's no better way to make sure things go smoothly than to just make sure they don't happen in the first place.
Because that's where it's going here, folks! Don't believe the hype that Pervez is trying to sell you. Will all of those who take Musharraf at his word please step forward? ...All three of you. All right, please step to one side. Go see the men in white coats, they'll take good care of you. The rest of you stick around, I haven't even begun yet.
The man has absolutely no shame. Here's my theory: He's been struggling to hang on to power for a while, and the U.S. government has been debating their options as to what to do when he's voted out of office. In order to hang on to the country he won in a coup and to maintain flagging ties with the U.S., old P.M. decides to make sure he'll never been voted out in the first place, maintaining power and proving his masculinity anew.
But now he's in a bind. The U.S. doesn't like what he's done and nobody will vote for him if he goes back to constitutional democracy. He has to remain in the state of emergency or just declare himself a dictator in order to hang on to power. If he does that, then he actually might be safe. The U.S. is notorious for propping dictators when they serve our needs, no matter the cost to the people of that country.
But there's another solution, albeit an unattractive one for our friend Pervez. Allow me to address you directly, General, and heed my words. The solution is this: Give up. There's still time for you to go back to democracy and accept your forthcoming electoral rape.
I admit you might not like that, but it's the only solution that allows you to be a decent person. Because what you have done, General, is nothing short of a petty grab for power reserved for only the most conniving, desperate dictators on the planet. It is a low blow to those of us who appreciated your help in fighting those who sought to rule through terror, to have a staunch ally turn around and become little better than what he has been ostensibly fighting against.
Unless you know something the rest of the world does not, General, stop your tomfoolery and give up the ghost. You will no longer be remembered as the leader of Pakistan that helped the United States in its fight against terrorism, but as the power-hungry fascist with no respect for the rights of his people. You've done enough damage to your country and to yourself. Cut it out.
And to the rest of you--don't take this lying down. The United States cannot afford to call itself the bastion of liberty and justice if we knowingly do business with dictators. Almost anything less than frantic distancing of ourselves from Musharraf and his rapidly totalitarian regime is unacceptable. It's time for us to quietly show Pervez the door and then loudly kick him through it, right in the seat of his pleated Army-issue dress trousers.
--Samus
(All information is from the New York Times. Categories: Pakistan and Pervez Musharraf.)
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
Thank you! This was actually very informative (and amusing). I do have a wireless connection but lately, I've been living under a rock as of politics and foreign affairs.
From what you're saying it sounds like he definitely makes himself conspicous. It's hard to believe that at times our government is foolhardy enough to connect with possible dictators to "fight terrorism." It's like pairing with a pimp to fight in the "war on drugs." It just doesn't make any sense.
Anyway, thanks for taking the time to post this :3
Not a problem, and may I thank you in turn for that pimp remark! I have to remember that one!
--Samus
(if you're not outraged, you're not paying attention)
Ah, what a good ally we have in our mission to spread democracy in the Middle East....
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything."
Friedrich Nietzsche
I think this is pretty much Musharaff's signature move. He has declared emergency rule a couple of times. He also doesn't really like giving deadlines for things like this, after all, it only emboldens the enemy. I am starting to think of "emergency" military rule as the Middle Eastern answer to the filibuster. The filibuster of course being the Western Democratic response to a 4 year old boy sticking his fingers in his ears and going "lalalalalalalalalalalala!" Hmm, I imagine a talkative 4 year old would be quite useful in a filibuster situation actually...
Back to things that actually matter... Everything is pretty much normal here, and that's the problem. "Our allies are as bad, or worse, than our enemies? A pseudo-president has declared military rule and begun dismantling the other branches of the government? Well, send out some sound bites declaring our disapproval while doing nothing with any actual impact." It would different if this were irregular, or if the United States didn't frequently take it upon themselves to show approval/disapproval of a foreign countries regime through various means.
America will stay allies with certain countries with almost no regards for that country's actions as long as it serves our needs. Pragmatic, but not exactly helpful when we later feel like justifying an invasion or sanctions on moral grounds. American leadership has never had much real interest in spreading democracy, only in spreading American influence.
Fuck, okay, that was also kind of a tangent. Jesus. Musharraff has painted himself into a political corner, but we may be there with him. If he relinquishes control he will lose his position, as you've pointed out, but we may also come out in a bad light to whoever takes over for not supporting our ideals of democracy. He may also decide to flat declare himself dictator. The US probably can't afford to just abandon ties because of that, and history says that we won't. Relations may be very strained, but we would be supporting a dictator who destroyed democracy in his own country while simultaneously "bringing democracy to the Middle East."
Musharraf has put us in a pretty nasty position with this move. Especially with elections coming up and the supreme court disbanded we look very bad for our continued support and lack of decisive action. How is it that when it comes to passing the PATRIOT Act or invading other countries decisive action is "absolutely necessary," but when allies turn rotten it is far more important to "play politics?" Until the late 90's we were still behind Saddam for God's sake.
One must actually have ideals to support them, and things like this clearly demonstrate that we have no ideals, and have no business defending them.
Res ipsa loquitur.
memento mori, mahalo.
"Patriotism is often an arbitrary veneration of real-estate above principles."