Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Pakistan President declares emergency rule

Options
  • 03-11-2007 8:41pm
    #1
    Dave!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,857 ✭✭✭✭


    http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSCOL19928320071103?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=69

    I don't know enough about the situation TBH... but Sky News are saying that a Supreme Court ruling will soon determine if Musharraf's election is unconstitutional (because he was head of the army while running, I think).

    Is there a legitimate reason to declare emergency rule, or is this simply to hold onto power and prevent democratic rule?


«13

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Mick86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 982 ✭✭✭Mick86


    DaveMcG wrote: »
    Is there a legitimate reason to declare emergency rule, or is this simply to hold onto power and prevent democratic rule?

    He's got an emergency ongoing giving him the excuse to dispose of a few hindrances to his rule. Bad news if you are Pakistani.


  • Options
    #3
    flogen
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 10,247 Mod ✭✭✭✭flogen


    I don't think you could call it legitimate.

    His reason apparently is that the Supreme Court is too politicisied - his real reason is almost certainly that they could deem his rule unconstitutional (which they can't do if there's no constitution!)... that said those two stories can and do fit side by side too, in that if the Supreme Court was politicised it may deem his election unconstitutional based on opinion rather than law.

    Either way, it simply ensures that democracy is not going to come to Pakistan soon and it's hard to imagine Musharraf stepping away from power easily when he's doing things like this.


  • Options
    #4
    Bren_M.Records
    Closed Accounts Posts: 221 ✭✭Bren_M.Records


    I think Pakistan is in for a very rough couple of decades to be honest.
    Thats if Pakistan as we know it is even around in twenty years!
    About the only thing the peoples of Pakistan have in common is that the majority of them are Sunni Muslim.
    Much of the west of the country including the North West Frontier Province and the the Tribal belt including the Waziristans are ethnic Pashtun's and have more in common with the people of South and Eastern Afghanistan than many of their fellow Pakistani nationals.
    In the South of Pakistan is Baluchistan which makes up over a quater of the whole land mass of Pakistan and these people are like a subsect of the Pashtuns who again have more in common with the people of the extreme South of Afghanistan and the East of Iran.

    I think the real nightmare is a sort of Pashtuni/Baluchistan type country as there are about 50 million who ethnically belong to these groups and are deeply radicalised by the decades of being used as pawns in other peoples wars.
    This is of course way down the road if it even happens but the outline of such a fracture is already starting to take place in Afghanistan and Pakistan and this latest move by Musharaff only adds to the problems long term for the country.

    Heres an article by Jason Burke which was recently in the Guardain about a Pashtun/Balochi area of Pakistan

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,2201346,00.html


  • Options
    #5
    Mr.Micro
    Registered Users Posts: 5,336 ✭✭✭Mr.Micro


    Musharraf is a dictator and the high court ruling may well have shown that he was illegally elected president .He is no more interested in democracy than any other dictator.He allowed the Taleban to be armed and supplied and now it has all backed fired on the evil brute.He is responsible for thousands of deaths .


  • Options
    #6
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Mr.Micro wrote: »
    He allowed the Taleban to be armed and supplied and now it has all backed fired on the evil brute.
    I wouldn't be a fan of Musharraf but I wouldn't say he is an "evil brute". I'm not sure what you are implying in saying he "allowed" the Taliban arm itself in NWFP. You're not actuallly suggesting he is in league with the Taliban, are you?
    flogen wrote:
    His reason apparently is that the Supreme Court is too politicisied
    Hardly surprising given his recent treatment of Justice Chaudhry.
    flogen wrote:
    his real reason is almost certainly that they could deem his rule unconstitutional
    Agreed. He seems unprepared to give up his "second skin".


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    flogen
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 10,247 Mod ✭✭✭✭flogen


    djpbarry wrote: »
    I wouldn't be a fan of Musharraf but I wouldn't say he is an "evil brute". I'm not sure what you are implying in saying he "allowed" the Taliban arm itself in NWFP. You're not actuallly suggesting he is in league with the Taliban, are you?

    Hardly surprising given his recent treatment of Justice Chaudhry.

    True, and of course it's a bullshít argument because he has no problem in politicising the judiciary as long as it's in his favour.
    Agreed. He seems unprepared to give up his "second skin".

    Power corrupts, total power etc. etc.


  • Options
    #8
    Mick86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 982 ✭✭✭Mick86


    Of course the most important consideration is who ends up with their finger on Pakistan's nuclear trigger.


  • Options
    #9
    Mr.Micro
    Registered Users Posts: 5,336 ✭✭✭Mr.Micro


    djpbarry wrote: »
    I wouldn't be a fan of Musharraf but I wouldn't say he is an "evil brute". I'm not sure what you are implying in saying he "allowed" the Taliban arm itself in NWFP. You're not actuallly suggesting he is in league with the Taliban, are you?

    Hardly surprising given his recent treatment of Justice Chaudhry.

    Agreed. He seems unprepared to give up his "second skin".

    Pakistan supplied arms to the Taleban and allowed their proliferation many even seeing the Taleban as ideological and the way to go.Officially it was denied that Pakistan did this but Afghanistan is a corridor that Pakistan wanted control of and by using the Taleban it sought to do so indirectly never thinking how crazy the Taleban are and uncontrollable they have proved to be.


  • Options
    #10
    jonny72
    Closed Accounts Posts: 674 ✭✭✭jonny72


    Mick86 wrote: »
    Of course the most important consideration is who ends up with their finger on Pakistan's nuclear trigger.

    I was reading recently that the US actually has a plan to take control of Pakistan's nukes in case of political meltdown/whatever. Too many extremists in that country.


  • Options
    #11
    Mr.Micro
    Registered Users Posts: 5,336 ✭✭✭Mr.Micro


    jonny72 wrote: »
    I was reading recently that the US actually has a plan to take control of Pakistan's nukes in case of political meltdown/whatever. Too many extremists in that country.

    I cant really see ,with respect how the US could do this as it would not be acceptable to the Pakistani people and it would need a major force of soldiers.The irony is that such a volatile country as this is allowed to keep nuclear weapons and Iran is not allowed at all . Cannot get my head around it ????


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Mr.Micro wrote: »
    Pakistan supplied arms to the Taleban and allowed their proliferation many even seeing the Taleban as ideological and the way to go.
    The Taliban certainly does not have the support of "many" people in Pakistan.
    Mr.Micro wrote: »
    Officially it was denied that Pakistan did this but Afghanistan is a corridor that Pakistan wanted control of and by using the Taleban it sought to do so indirectly never thinking how crazy the Taleban are and uncontrollable they have proved to be.
    No, not really. Musharraf has voiced his "support" for Afghanistan in the past, but his hands are tied on this issue - a large number of Pakistanis have Afghan blood. His main concern was preventing Afghanistan (one of the poorest countries in the world) from being attacked by the US.

    Besides, if Musharraf truly supported Taliban ideals, why has Sharia law not been imposed in Pakistan?
    Mr.Micro wrote: »
    The irony is that such a volatile country as this is allowed to keep nuclear weapons and Iran is not allowed at all . Cannot get my head around it ????
    Highly unlikely that Musharraf will ever use nukes, but, no nation should possess such weapons.


  • Options
    #13
    Mr.Micro
    Registered Users Posts: 5,336 ✭✭✭Mr.Micro


    In reply DJPBARRY, control of Afghanistan was the real objective of Pakistan .As we know countries will use methods and means to do so ,in this case arming the Taliban .Its like the US using Pakistan ,Saudia Arabia and several other countries that have dictatorships ,it does not mean the US admires their ideology its purely business ,a means to an end. Its not a case of Musharraf using nuclear weapons, its what happens if such a country became fragmented and civil war broke out then control would be lost.


  • Options
    #14
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Mr.Micro wrote: »
    control of Afghanistan was the real objective of Pakistan
    My question was, what are you basing this on?
    Mr.Micro wrote: »
    As we know countries will use methods and means to do so ,in this case arming the Taliban
    During the Soviet war, the Mujahideen were funded by the US, not Pakistan - the funds merely passed through Zia. In doing so, Zia voiced his opposition to communism, rather than support for the Mujahideen. Besides, most of his cabinet were opposed to involvement in the conflict.


  • Options
    #15
    Dave!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,857 ✭✭✭✭Dave!


    http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSL0449460320071105?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=69

    Protesting lawyers get batoned and teargased


  • Options
    #16
    nacho libre
    Registered Users Posts: 16,782 ✭✭✭✭nacho libre


    djpbarry wrote: »
    I wouldn't be a fan of Musharraf but I wouldn't say he is an "evil brute". I'm not sure what you are implying in saying he "allowed" the Taliban arm itself in NWFP. You're not actuallly suggesting he is in league with the Taliban, are you?
    .

    I think he and some of his former friends in the ISI at one time were supporters of the Taliban. He turned on the Taliban when George gave him the option of joining the 'coalition of the willing' or face Pakistan being bombed back to the stone age.


  • Options
    #17
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    nacho libre wrote: »
    I think he and some of his former friends in the ISI at one time were supporters of the Taliban.
    I doubt it. Musharraf is a moderate (in religious terms). He takes his lead from people such as Ataturk rather than religious fundamentalism.
    nacho libre wrote: »
    He turned on the Taliban when George gave him the option of joining the 'coalition of the willing' or face Pakistan being bombed back to the stone age.
    I wouldn't say he "turned on the Taliban" so much as he was forced to side with the US.


  • Options
    #18
    Mr.Micro
    Registered Users Posts: 5,336 ✭✭✭Mr.Micro


    djpbarry wrote: »
    I doubt it. Musharraf is a moderate (in religious terms). He takes his lead from people such as Ataturk rather than religious fundamentalism.

    I wouldn't say he "turned on the Taliban" so much as he was forced to side with the US.

    AS I posted earlier you do not have to be a fan of a group to use them for your means . Musharraf as you say is not a fundamentalist but he had ambitions for Afghanistan .The US will fund anybody against the Communists but the Taliban are completely different and the Mughadeen lost the war against the Taliban .


  • Options
    #19
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Mr.Micro wrote: »
    Musharraf as you say is not a fundamentalist but he had ambitions for Afghanistan
    What are you basing that on? It would appear to be your own opinion.


  • Options
    #20
    Mr.Micro
    Registered Users Posts: 5,336 ✭✭✭Mr.Micro


    djpbarry wrote: »
    What are you basing that on? It would appear to be your own opinion.

    No its not my opinion .Geographically Afghanistan is seen as an east west corridor and an oil and gas pipeline was planned to go through it So it is an important area if you had control of it .Since Afghanistan has been in a state of war for so long any such plans are on hold but when the Russians left the war started between the Mughadeen and the Taliban ,the latter as I have said supported by many in Pakistan . Since then as we know the Taliban lost to the US and Pakistan appeared to embrace the Americans post 9/11.


  • Options
    #21
    smirkingmaurice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 59 ✭✭smirkingmaurice


    I think its none of our business whats going on in pakistan, sure whats the point in us worrying about it


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    KIVES
    Closed Accounts Posts: 192 ✭✭KIVES


    smirkingmaurice wrote: »
    I think its none of our business whats going on in pakistan, sure whats the point in us worrying about it
    It's dismissive idea's like that which has the Indian sub continent and in the fractious state it's in today...I think it's in everybody's interest to be healthily concerned at such issues.It's more important than the price of lame ferrets you know


  • Options
    #23
    smirkingmaurice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 59 ✭✭smirkingmaurice


    The pakistani's really could do without the attention considering the political climate there at the mo,sometimes its better to ignore that kind of thing and be a bit more positive


  • Options
    #24
    KIVES
    Closed Accounts Posts: 192 ✭✭KIVES


    My best friends Auntie works for the UN Humanitarian Section and she visited Pakistan last Autumn-she said the amount of opposition to Mustaraff was frightening-anti-American strain of public opinion were rife and the only thing that was holding it all together was the Army's support for the general...She said Karachi was a den of iniquity far removed from the more straightlined+disciplined culture of Islamabad-She generally knows her stuff


  • Options
    #25
    smirkingmaurice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 59 ✭✭smirkingmaurice


    A friend of mine went backpacking there 4 years ago, never came back but still sends postcards, says its dirt cheap out there


  • Options
    #26
    smirkingmaurice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 59 ✭✭smirkingmaurice


    Says its really hot too, like an asian mediteranean, miles of beaches and the likes


  • Options
    #27
    smirkingmaurice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 59 ✭✭smirkingmaurice


    He's invited me out, he stays in a nice wee cottage up the north at the foot of the mountains during the winter, catch a bit of snow and the likes. The locals he says couldn't give a rats arse about politics so I might head out yet


  • Options
    #28
    moe_sizlak
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 883 ✭✭✭moe_sizlak


    smirkingmaurice wrote: »
    He's invited me out, he stays in a nice wee cottage up the north at the foot of the mountains during the winter, catch a bit of snow and the likes. The locals he says couldn't give a rats arse about politics so I might head out yet

    sounds like he could be a convert to osama,s team


  • Options
    #29
    KIVES
    Closed Accounts Posts: 192 ✭✭KIVES


    moe_sizlak wrote: »
    sounds like he could be a convert to osama,s team
    There is another line of thinking that rings through aswell-like every country on earth 30% or more of the population are so detached from Politics that their lives meander onwards regardless...sounds as if this guy is setting up the first all purpose Pakistani ski-ing resort - an Asian Val-de-Ser...


  • Options
    #30
    smirkingmaurice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 59 ✭✭smirkingmaurice


    thankfully he says he's no intentions of upsetting anyone out there with his secular ways, says the only thing he ever fought over was a cut of goats leg from the local butcher,misunderstanding over the weight or something,says he'll spend another year or two over and why not eh!!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    jonny72
    Closed Accounts Posts: 674 ✭✭✭jonny72


    80% of Pakistanis are illiterate.. a country with nuclear weapons.. extremists.. some of the biggest illegal gun markets in the world.. a military dictator..

    Very volatile altogether..


Advertisement