MUSHARRAF: HAS THE PAKISTANI PRESIDENT BECOME A GIGANTIC EMBARRASSMENT FOR THE USA? Or Did The US Give Tacit Approval To Impose Martial Law?

(Photo:The Sunday Times)
As the historic developments unfold in Pakistan with the military “dictator” and president, General Musharraf, declaring a “state-of-emergency or martial law ” by suspending the Constitution and sacking Supreme Court judges, coupled with arresting opposition leaders, one cannot help but laugh at the manner in which the General continues to play the West, in particular the Bush administration. Besides ruling in a non-democratic manner for almost eight years, the General’s total disregard for the rule of law is a blatant exhibition of unquestionable arrogance, and utter desperation to hold on to power at any cost. The term “democracy” is just a meaningless “word” in his mind.

It is obvious the General could care less about the “rule of law,” that is supposed to be the foundation for the country’s system of governance; which includes the judiciary. This goes to show that the West, especially the USA, cannot continue to waiver in its position of turning a blind eye to rulers such as Musharraf when democracy is placed on the back burner under the guise of fighting extremism and terrorism. After all, the so called “Islamic extremists” are Pakistanis too. One might pose the question as just who is actually the extremists in this case; the General or the Islamic factions ?

General Musharraf is obviously playing into the hands of opposition groups, including “Bin Laden” as well. Even though the General may give the impression he is taking “extreme” actions unilaterally, irrespective of whether the US and other western nations agree or not, there is not an iota of doubt in this blogger’s mind that he conferred with the US ambassador in Pakistan or someone in the Bush administration before embarking on such a calculated and well orchestrated effort to preempt the Supreme Court’s forthcoming ruling on whether his candidacy for the presidency was legal. Unquestionably, more-likely-than-not the USA gave its tacit approval.

Thus, it is quite hypocritical of the Bush administration to publicly condemn the actions of President Chavez of Venezuela, who by the way-whether rightly or wrongly-is attempting to amend the Constitution “within” the democratic process to allow him to run for another term in office versus a military dictator such as General Musharraf who is in actuality perpetrating a second coup against the Pakistani people and their democratic system of government; claiming there is a swirling Islamic terrorist threat that must be squelched by taking “extreme” measures.

Certainly, there will be public pronouncements from the US administration admonishing President Musharraf’s “extremism,” talk of applying sanctions or suspending certain aid programs, but privately and behind the scenes-out of the public eye-there will be encouragement to contain the so called Islamic extremists as well as a promise of expanded military support. In other words, the hell with democratic ideals when a USA supported dictator’s political future is at stake. As a consequence, the end justifies the means. But there are no gray areas in this case; purely black and white. Either democratic principles are supported and enforced, or they are not. You decide!


__________
Read more on this issue: Click Link.