Thursday, 15 November 2007

Panel Discussion- MA, USA - Nov 28

Panel Discussion - Mount Holyoke College, MA, Nov 28th


Anonymous said...


We request all those taking part in this descussion on Nov 28 to highlight the point that Micky Mouse USA and Cockroach England, both are interfering in our political affairs which is unacceptable to us. First the Genocidal CIA brought Bush-arraf to power and then Richard Armitage, the previous under secretary in the Terrorist Department (State Dpt) phoned Busharraf and told him to join in the American terrorism in Afghanistan otherwise Pakistan will be bombarded to stone ages. And now, this under secretary of state, John Nigger Ponte has arrived in wonderful Pakistan to tell Busharraf to restore democracy ?? No. He has only come to provide a way out for Busharraf because Busharraf is a war criminal and is looking after the interests of Micky Mouse USA. Christian terrorist BUSH who has killed 1 million people in Iraq is happy with Busharraf and he wants Busharraf to stay so that he can continue to lick the boots of Christian terrorist Bush.

We have had enough of all this political circus and we dont want any interference in our affairs any more. We want Micky Mouse America and Cockroach England to keep out of our affairs and mind their own business.

Cockroach England

state_of_pakistan said...

Mr. Negroponte: Please Go Home

By Yousuf Nazar*
November 18 , 2007

The US Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte is in Islamabad to ask Musharraf to lift emergency and hold free and fair elections in Pakistan, according to the state department sources. His real purpose is to revive Musharraf- Bhutto negotiations in order to find a way out of the stalemate caused by General’s illegal and unconstitutional actions that have forced Pakistan's opposition leader and former prime minister Benazir Bhutto to take a firm stand and demand Musharraf’s resignation. Mr. Negroponte called Musharraf an ‘indispensable ally’ only a few days ago and it is clear that the US would like to help Musharraf and if this effort fails, would like to impose another facade of democracy on Pakistan through the help of other generals and by putting pressure on ‘moderate’ parties to cooperate with them. The people of Pakistan want democracy. It is only true democracy that can ensure Pakistan’s development, stability, and peaceful relations with its neighbours. The people of Pakistan have suffered for a long time from military dictatorships backed by the United States. This model failed to bring either stability or progress. It is not just for some emotional or religious reason that the people are overwhelmingly against the US policies here. People of Pakistan have never supported a theocratic or authoritarian form of government. But their will has been subverted by outright dictatorial rule - supported by the religious right-wing - or through civilian facade manipulated through rigged elections and brazen horse trading. The US has always sided with the military.

The seething anti-Americanism in Pakistan is a far cry from the days in the aftermath of 9/11 when a wave of sympathy for the US swept Pakistan and Pakistanis extended full support to General Musharraf to join the ‘War on Terror’. In 2007, it is appears that it is a matter of only few years that this seething anger and a sense of helplessness against the combined might of the army generals and World’s sole super power would turn into a popular uprising . The ‘buying time’ approach is short-sighted and fraught with high risks. The US has tried this sort of ‘moderate’ setups (read pliable local forces willing to toe the US line for moderate ) in the recent history with predictable result - failure.

But Pakistan is not Lebanon or Palestine. Its establishment may be bought off but the patience of the people is running out. One example was almost universal support extended by the people to the lawyers who launched the movement for the reinstatement of Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry. That symbolized the belief of the vast majority of the people in democracy and the rule of law. It also demonstrated to the political parties that people yearned for a real change.

In the 1980s, the US supported Ziaul Haq- the worst dictator of Pakistan’s history, and financed the so-called jihad in Afghanistan. The soviet intervention was provoked by the covert actions of the US as per Brzezinski’s own admission in 1998. This did contribute to the fall of communist Soviet Union but at a great cost to Pakistan. Pakistan was never to recover from the problems that arose due to the influx of millions of Afghan refugees and their use by Zia and the CIA in the war.

Daniel L. Byman of Saban Center for Middle East Policy, in a recent paper (The Next Phase of the Iraq War) for Brookings -a US think- wrote, “refugee camps can also be incubators for terrorist groups. Young men—bored, embittered, and accustomed to a world of violent politics—are natural recruits. Many Palestinian refugees flocked to join terrorist groups, preferring radical solutions to the endless failed attempts to address their plight peacefully. Over time, refugees can also radicalize the politics of their host nations. In Lebanon during the early 1970s, the presence of thousands of armed Palestinians in the country inevitably became a contentious political issue and pushed the country toward civil war. In Pakistan today, commentators fear the “Talibanization” of the country, a reference to the way in which Pakistan’s support for the Afghan refugees who formed the core of the Taliban in the 1990s has come back to haunt Pakistan. Sectarian strife, suicide bombings, and religious radicalism are now far more prevalent in Pakistan.”

The US goal of putting together a facade of democracy with General Musharraf or some other general sharing power with ‘moderate’ political forces is aimed at continuing the military campaign against the militants. The militarist approach has meant that many in the US establishment, particularly in Pentagon, see Pakistan’ Army as being indispensable to achieving its strategic objectives in Pakistan and Afghanistan. But has this conventional wisdom worked?

Mark L. Schneider of International Crisis Group told the House Foreign Affairs Committee on “Counternarcotics and Police Training” in Afghanistan, on 4 October 2007, “there was a disturbing failure to commit sufficient resources — either military or reconstruction aid to Afghanistan — by the U.S. and by the international community; an even greater failure to require the Pakistan government to close Taliban command and control centers, sanctuaries and Taliban recruiting in Jihadi mosques and madrassas; and an absolute refusal to recognise the links between exploding opium trafficking, insecurity and a corrosive culture of impunity.”

Clearly, the US has been wrong to assume that those who benefit from perpetuation of the conflict [e.g., General Musharraf] would help to end it. Further more, this military campaign is based on a dangerous premise - 40 percent pushtun population of Afghanistan is Talibans or its sympathizers. A military solution to bring peace and stability to a war torn narco-state of Afghanistan, in the face of growing religious sentiment combined with nationalist pushtun feelings, is doomed to fail. The US pays lip service to the development but its record is dismal and is scoffed at by the locals . The US failure in Afghanistan has fuelled an insurgency that has created civil war like conditions in the north west frontier region of Pakistan. A little more money now is going to be ‘too little, too late’. The insurgency has already destabilized the military regime in Pakistan and could lead to a bigger catastrophe. The worst outcome will be a pushtun rebellion on both sides of Durand line, the border between the two countries. At the least, it would make Pakistan ungovernable with unpredictable consequences.

The US should encourage all the local and regional stakeholders to evolve a strategy to deal with the crisis instead of trying to impose its own ‘alliances’. This approach is counter productive and will weaken those democratic forces who genuinely want democracy. Labelling them as ‘moderates’ by the US may make them look like ‘US lackeys’. Any political force with that image is unlikely to be effective in meeting the challenge of bringing stability and peace to Pakistan because its policies won’t command broad-based popular support. Hence, it is in the best interest of the US to leave Pakistan to its freedom and democracy loving people including its brave judges and lawyers, and for Mr. Negroponte to stop supporting Musharraf and go home.


Yousuf Nazar is a former head of emerging markets investments,Citigroup London.

Anonymous said...


Yousuf, I mostly agree with you. John Nigger Ponte has been sent by the Jungle woman, Condoleeza Rice to provide some kind of covert support to Busharraf and get him out of this predicament. Micky Mouse USA & Cockroach England, both have no interest in the restoration of democracy in wonderful Pakistan and they are looking for providing continous support for Busharraf through Benazir = Bay-Sharam, who has looted over 70 billion rupees from Pakistan. The two notorious Sharif Badmaashs (Nawaz Sharif & Shahbaz Sharif) together looted over 60 billion rupees and they both, are now unfit to govern wonderful Pakistan. We want to give our great hero Imran Khan a chance. And while at it, we want the two International terrorists, Micky Mouse USA and Cockroach England to keep out of our national politics.

Cockroach England

Anonymous said...

There are some thin if the legitimate work as a line there. Most are sites and marketing study for the site owner rich, not you. The only thing is true legitimacy Ebay, selling things you already own