02-23-2008, 12:38 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-"ramana"+-->QUOTE("ramana")<!--QuoteEBegin-->Op-Ed in Pioneer, 22 Feb.,2008
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->
Meanwhile, Washington is nervous
The other voice: S Rajagopalan | Washington correspondent The Pioneer
Is this endgame time for George W Bush's Musharraf policy? Why is the voice of the Democrats fractured? <b>Washington this week is looking for all kinds of signs that would bring Americans the hope that Pakistan, with or without General 'Indispensable Ally', could still be a partner in the 'war against terror'</b>
For months on end, the writing on the wall was there for all to see. <b>But the Bush Administration was in no mood to dump its "indispensable ally" -- President Pervez Musharraf.</b> In the week's epochal elections he was the one man who was not on the ballot, but who has been defeated so decisively. <b>But Washington is not deserting him -- not just yet, anyway -- even as it tries to reach out to the new leadership with open arms.</b>
<b>President George W Bush, in the midst of an African sojourn, took time off to speak to Gen Musharraf.</b> What the two discussed has not been revealed, but no one expects Mr Bush to have followed the Washington Post's advice: That he urge his "not-so-indispensable ally" to step down as part of a new American policy to bolster Pakistan's re-emerging democratic centre.
Mr Bush has studiously avoided making a public comment on the political future of the General in Islamabad. His spokesperson, while repeating the line that Gen Musharraf has been "a strong US ally", evasively stated that it is "up to the Pakistani people to decide" (whether he should retain his position). The word out of the State Department is that the US will continue working with both Gen Musharraf and the new Government that takes office in Islamabad.
<i>{This flies in the face of dictats to Zardari as reproted in the TSP press. Could be overblown but there is no smoke without fire! So this means DC is trying to have it both ways. DupleeCity verily}</i>
As the PPP and PML(N) thrash out the nuts and bolts of Government formation, now that they have agreed on a coalition set-up, <b>Washington is clearly buying time to formulate a new Pakistan policy or, at least, fine-tune its existing one.</b> Some analysts, however, wonder if drastic changes would be attempted by the Bush Administration, now that less than a year of its tenure is left.
For a long time now, <b>Democrats, led by Mr Joe Biden, chairman of the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee, have slammed Mr Bush for putting all the eggs in Gen Musharraf's basket. As Mr Biden puts it, what the administration has been pursuing is a "Musharraf policy", instead of a Pakistan policy.</b> He reckons that the electoral verdict provides the US with the opportunity to hammer out a policy that focuses on the entire populace of Pakistan.
Earlier this month, Mr Biden and eight other prominent Senators moved a resolution, urging Mr Bush to review all US aid to Pakistan to ensure that the assistance is used to fight violent radicalism and promote a free and democratic nation. <b>The US has doled out more than $ 10 billion to Pakistan since Gen Musharraf made the tactical transition as a US ally after the 9/11 terror strikes in 2001.</b>
<b>The speculation in Washington right now is whether the PPP-PML(N) coalition and supporting groups would muster the requisite two-thirds majority and push for Gen Musharraf's impeachment -- a contingency unlikely to appeal to the Bush Administration for fear that the resulting instability could weaken the war on terror at a time of resurgence of the Al Qaeda-Taliban combine. </b>
<b>"We need Pakistan as an important ally. We've got common interests. We've got interests in dealing with radicals who killed Benazir Bhutto. We've got interests in helping make sure there's no safe haven from which people can plot and plan attacks against the United States of America and Pakistan," said Mr Bush</b> in his first comments after the elections inflicted a crushing defeat on the pro-Musharraf PML(Q).
<i>{Talk about cognitive dissonance.. TSP was the one that seeded and nurtured the Taliban and other Islamic terrorists as a state policy under US guidance. The only reason why Mushy agreed to become an ally is the US envoy Armitage threatened to bomb TSP to stone age. And to add insult to injury India offered bases for the US to attack Afghanistan. The US accepted the TSP as a ally on GOAT in order to corral all the dregs in Afghanistan inside TSP to minimize their costs of invading Afghanistan. These coralled terrorists have taken over the NWFP areas and have started routing TSP polic forces and could eventually migrate to the ciites. Mushy has provided safe sanctuary to Islamic terrorists. If he is the ally in the GOAT then there is the Brooklyn bridge still for sale. It would be in US interest to take a back seat and let the TSP people sort out their affairs which got hijacked by the RAPE, ARMY and US for their global interests. The $10B in 'aid' was rentier money that TSP always got from the Indian heartland. So what is the complaint. They got the services they paid for. Instead of mollycoddling the terrorist in cheif the US should have coralled the nukes. Looks like they are no and this charade of ally n the war on terrorism is being bandied about. What this means is Bush admin not only failed in Iraq but also in TSP.}</i>
That Washington expects Gen Musharraf to remain in the saddle for now was apparent from the State Department's remarks. <b>As Deputy Spokesman Tom Casey put it, "Ultimately, President Musharraf is still the president of Pakistan and certainly we would hope that whoever becomes Prime Minister and whoever winds up in charge of the new Government would be able to work with him and with all other factions." </b>
<i>{Dont let your policy imperative become TSP's governance problem. If there is process to get rid of him it should be allowed to happen. Who died and let you make policy for the people of TSP?}</i>
Though the two principal coalition partners have fallen short of the two-thirds majority to impeach Gen Musharraf, officialdom in Washington is keeping its fingers crossed. South Asia specialists have little doubt that Mr Nawaz Sharif and Mr Asif Zardari, no matter their present differences on this issue, will go for Gen Musharraf's scalp.
<i>{Its not a matter of going after his scalp. He has wig. Its about accountability. His 'election' was considered illegal and let the TSP people decide their own thing That is called self determination. They want the same rights that the US supports in Kosovo!}</i>
<b>Stephen Cohen </b>of the Brookings Institution feels the Bush Administration is behind the curve on this. "They tried to manage Musharraf's continuation in power, but he's probably going to go -- unless there's so much chaos among the politicians that he can play them off against each other," he says.
<b>Michael Krepon</b> of the Stimson Centre says his sense is that Mr Zardari and Mr Sharif will work in concert to remove Gen Musharraf, beginning with the restoration of an independent judiciary. He believes that if and when Gen Musharraf leaves office, the centrifugal forces of Pakistani politics would gain momentum all over again.
"It's clear that while Gen Musharraf is nominally President, <b>the key for the US is Gen Ashfaq Kayani and the Army," says Cohen</b>. He reckons that Gen Kayani has started undoing some of Gen Musharraf's damage to the armed forces, but adds it is hard to predict how far he would be willing to go in mounting an effective campaign against the Taliban.
<i>{Alas Cohen has become a one string violin player. He is too involved with the RATs to see the light. He is still slurping samosas cooked by Gen Zia's wife.}</i>
The first bone of contention is expected to be over the reinstatement of deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry and other Supreme Court judges. In an interview to the Wall Street Journal, Gen Musharraf has taken the stand that there is no way of bringing back the dismissed judges, at least legally. "I can't even imagine how this is doable," he said, sounding an ominous note.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If the experts were not involved in the policy they would recognize that there is a unwritten compact about the judiciary in TSP. Judiciary is off limits in all previous coups. Mushy broke that and lost his legitimacy and that of the RATS. So he will go no matter what DC thinks and hopes.
Kiyanis big task is to restore RATS legitimacy. He is working to that pattern.
If the restored judiciary oust him then Kiyani wont do anything. If there are moves to impeach him with the 2/3 vote then there will be a coup.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->
Meanwhile, Washington is nervous
The other voice: S Rajagopalan | Washington correspondent The Pioneer
Is this endgame time for George W Bush's Musharraf policy? Why is the voice of the Democrats fractured? <b>Washington this week is looking for all kinds of signs that would bring Americans the hope that Pakistan, with or without General 'Indispensable Ally', could still be a partner in the 'war against terror'</b>
For months on end, the writing on the wall was there for all to see. <b>But the Bush Administration was in no mood to dump its "indispensable ally" -- President Pervez Musharraf.</b> In the week's epochal elections he was the one man who was not on the ballot, but who has been defeated so decisively. <b>But Washington is not deserting him -- not just yet, anyway -- even as it tries to reach out to the new leadership with open arms.</b>
<b>President George W Bush, in the midst of an African sojourn, took time off to speak to Gen Musharraf.</b> What the two discussed has not been revealed, but no one expects Mr Bush to have followed the Washington Post's advice: That he urge his "not-so-indispensable ally" to step down as part of a new American policy to bolster Pakistan's re-emerging democratic centre.
Mr Bush has studiously avoided making a public comment on the political future of the General in Islamabad. His spokesperson, while repeating the line that Gen Musharraf has been "a strong US ally", evasively stated that it is "up to the Pakistani people to decide" (whether he should retain his position). The word out of the State Department is that the US will continue working with both Gen Musharraf and the new Government that takes office in Islamabad.
<i>{This flies in the face of dictats to Zardari as reproted in the TSP press. Could be overblown but there is no smoke without fire! So this means DC is trying to have it both ways. DupleeCity verily}</i>
As the PPP and PML(N) thrash out the nuts and bolts of Government formation, now that they have agreed on a coalition set-up, <b>Washington is clearly buying time to formulate a new Pakistan policy or, at least, fine-tune its existing one.</b> Some analysts, however, wonder if drastic changes would be attempted by the Bush Administration, now that less than a year of its tenure is left.
For a long time now, <b>Democrats, led by Mr Joe Biden, chairman of the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee, have slammed Mr Bush for putting all the eggs in Gen Musharraf's basket. As Mr Biden puts it, what the administration has been pursuing is a "Musharraf policy", instead of a Pakistan policy.</b> He reckons that the electoral verdict provides the US with the opportunity to hammer out a policy that focuses on the entire populace of Pakistan.
Earlier this month, Mr Biden and eight other prominent Senators moved a resolution, urging Mr Bush to review all US aid to Pakistan to ensure that the assistance is used to fight violent radicalism and promote a free and democratic nation. <b>The US has doled out more than $ 10 billion to Pakistan since Gen Musharraf made the tactical transition as a US ally after the 9/11 terror strikes in 2001.</b>
<b>The speculation in Washington right now is whether the PPP-PML(N) coalition and supporting groups would muster the requisite two-thirds majority and push for Gen Musharraf's impeachment -- a contingency unlikely to appeal to the Bush Administration for fear that the resulting instability could weaken the war on terror at a time of resurgence of the Al Qaeda-Taliban combine. </b>
<b>"We need Pakistan as an important ally. We've got common interests. We've got interests in dealing with radicals who killed Benazir Bhutto. We've got interests in helping make sure there's no safe haven from which people can plot and plan attacks against the United States of America and Pakistan," said Mr Bush</b> in his first comments after the elections inflicted a crushing defeat on the pro-Musharraf PML(Q).
<i>{Talk about cognitive dissonance.. TSP was the one that seeded and nurtured the Taliban and other Islamic terrorists as a state policy under US guidance. The only reason why Mushy agreed to become an ally is the US envoy Armitage threatened to bomb TSP to stone age. And to add insult to injury India offered bases for the US to attack Afghanistan. The US accepted the TSP as a ally on GOAT in order to corral all the dregs in Afghanistan inside TSP to minimize their costs of invading Afghanistan. These coralled terrorists have taken over the NWFP areas and have started routing TSP polic forces and could eventually migrate to the ciites. Mushy has provided safe sanctuary to Islamic terrorists. If he is the ally in the GOAT then there is the Brooklyn bridge still for sale. It would be in US interest to take a back seat and let the TSP people sort out their affairs which got hijacked by the RAPE, ARMY and US for their global interests. The $10B in 'aid' was rentier money that TSP always got from the Indian heartland. So what is the complaint. They got the services they paid for. Instead of mollycoddling the terrorist in cheif the US should have coralled the nukes. Looks like they are no and this charade of ally n the war on terrorism is being bandied about. What this means is Bush admin not only failed in Iraq but also in TSP.}</i>
That Washington expects Gen Musharraf to remain in the saddle for now was apparent from the State Department's remarks. <b>As Deputy Spokesman Tom Casey put it, "Ultimately, President Musharraf is still the president of Pakistan and certainly we would hope that whoever becomes Prime Minister and whoever winds up in charge of the new Government would be able to work with him and with all other factions." </b>
<i>{Dont let your policy imperative become TSP's governance problem. If there is process to get rid of him it should be allowed to happen. Who died and let you make policy for the people of TSP?}</i>
Though the two principal coalition partners have fallen short of the two-thirds majority to impeach Gen Musharraf, officialdom in Washington is keeping its fingers crossed. South Asia specialists have little doubt that Mr Nawaz Sharif and Mr Asif Zardari, no matter their present differences on this issue, will go for Gen Musharraf's scalp.
<i>{Its not a matter of going after his scalp. He has wig. Its about accountability. His 'election' was considered illegal and let the TSP people decide their own thing That is called self determination. They want the same rights that the US supports in Kosovo!}</i>
<b>Stephen Cohen </b>of the Brookings Institution feels the Bush Administration is behind the curve on this. "They tried to manage Musharraf's continuation in power, but he's probably going to go -- unless there's so much chaos among the politicians that he can play them off against each other," he says.
<b>Michael Krepon</b> of the Stimson Centre says his sense is that Mr Zardari and Mr Sharif will work in concert to remove Gen Musharraf, beginning with the restoration of an independent judiciary. He believes that if and when Gen Musharraf leaves office, the centrifugal forces of Pakistani politics would gain momentum all over again.
"It's clear that while Gen Musharraf is nominally President, <b>the key for the US is Gen Ashfaq Kayani and the Army," says Cohen</b>. He reckons that Gen Kayani has started undoing some of Gen Musharraf's damage to the armed forces, but adds it is hard to predict how far he would be willing to go in mounting an effective campaign against the Taliban.
<i>{Alas Cohen has become a one string violin player. He is too involved with the RATs to see the light. He is still slurping samosas cooked by Gen Zia's wife.}</i>
The first bone of contention is expected to be over the reinstatement of deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry and other Supreme Court judges. In an interview to the Wall Street Journal, Gen Musharraf has taken the stand that there is no way of bringing back the dismissed judges, at least legally. "I can't even imagine how this is doable," he said, sounding an ominous note.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If the experts were not involved in the policy they would recognize that there is a unwritten compact about the judiciary in TSP. Judiciary is off limits in all previous coups. Mushy broke that and lost his legitimacy and that of the RATS. So he will go no matter what DC thinks and hopes.
Kiyanis big task is to restore RATS legitimacy. He is working to that pattern.
If the restored judiciary oust him then Kiyani wont do anything. If there are moves to impeach him with the 2/3 vote then there will be a coup.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->