The Choice in Pakistan is Democracy or Talibanization:
Guest Op-ed by Shahin M. Cole
Shahin M. Cole, Esq., writes:
'I am one of those Pakistan-trained lawyers you have been hearing about. I have spent the last few days watching on television how my colleagues have been dragged, kicked, and beaten by hired hands, just because of their political views. My former law school professors, some of whom are now judges or justices, are under house arrest. There is a real sense in which I left my country of birth precisely because of obstacles to the free expression of political and religious views.
Americans, who enjoy constitutional liberties of long standing, should support the lawyers in their protest against the suspension of the Pakistani constitution. Lawyers are supposed to act as the guardians of the rule of law. They are not supposed to be prisoners and hostages to the powers that be. There is no excuse for Gen. Pervez Musharraf to treat educated, accomplished attorneys and barristers, many of them human rights workers such as the prominent woman activist, Asma Jahangir, this way. Ironically, the general has often posed as a supporter of women’s rights, as when he established quotas to ensure the presence of women in parliament. Yet, he is now moving against women intellectuals and politicians for being outspoken.
How much of the blame for this crackdown can be laid at the feet of the Bush administration’s unconditional support for the Pakistani military? The events of this week put the lie to the idea of a democratizing Pakistan with an independent judiciary and rule of law. If the US wants to play a fair and honest role in helping Pakistan achieve democracy and reducing the threat of religious extremism, here is what it can do.
The US should be earmarking aid to Pakistan not for military use but for funding and building schools for the millions of poor Pakistani children (some of them still from refugee Afghan families displaced by the US struggle with the Soviet Union in the Cold War). Such schools should stress east-west understanding. That would be one way of keeping children out of fundamentalist-funded madrassas and keeping them from being turned into Taliban. Provision of rural adult education through television and of free country-wide wi-fi internet access would also aid development. This educational aid would cost a pittance in comparison with what is being spent on military aid, and would be far less expensive than is fighting wars in the region.
Washington should keep pressure on the present government to hold free and fair elections for parliament on schedule. US aid for election observers and voter education would be well spent. The Bush administration has stressed democratization and the rule of law in the Muslim world. If it does not take practical steps toward those ideals in this crisis, America will altogether lose the confidence of the educated Muslim middle classes. If that happens, the ultimate winners may well be the Taliban and al-Qaeda. '
Shahin M. Cole holds an LL.B. from Punjab University Law School in Lahore, Pakistan.

|
9 Comments:
The writer is a lawyer in Canada. I have read the events reported in the local and Pakistan newspapers. It is truly remarkable to see that many of the senior judges and much of the Bar in that country have taken to demonstrations in the streets to support law and order, the constitution, and the lawful process of civil life. Surely this is a showing of great courage from principled men and women who do the Bar proud in their conduct, carried out in circumstances of great personal peril.
Education is key, indeed.
Fundamentalists can become mainstream if nothing is done to balance their influence in the years to come.
Supporting troubled leaders at the top is one thing, abandoning moderate populations at the bottom another.
So much for "democracy" and "justice".
The problem is that, beyond the official agenda, the Bush Administration deliberately fuels radicalism. The aim of this sick theocon game is to see fundamentalism become mainstream across the world (great success so far, including in the US).
You have a faulty idea about what American cares about. You can get them active if they loose the flat wide screen monitor, if Internet Pornography restricted, but why you think they should care about freedom and democracy in Moslem country like Pakistan when they cared less about the missing 2.4 trillions from Pentagon budget, the National Debit nearing 10 trillions or all the incredible deficiencies and fatally flawed discrepancies of the 9/11 commission or the price of gas approaching $4 a gallon when it was 1.50 before the Iraq invasion.
But Juan Cole did note that Jamaat-i-Islami is also leading demonstrations. They might've gotten the people out sooner than the triple P and the lawyers. I think the U.S. media is underreporting JiI. I'm worried that JiI might wind up the driving force behind opposition to the state of emergency. Or are the lawyers and the PPP really the most prominent elements in the opposition now? Or are those two groups cooperating with JiI?
- Inkan1969
"The US should be earmarking aid to Pakistan not for military use..."
a noble sentiment but completely at cross-purposes with the reasons the aid is offered in the first place... the u.s. is spending money to make more money, channeling vast sums of taxpayer-generated funds to pakistan in a quid pro quo, namely that pakistan will turn around and send that money right back to the u.s. in the form of massive defense purchases, purchases that only serve to maintain the rivers of cash flowing into the coffers of the already super-rich elites that call the shots in the u.s... offering principled advice to the criminals that run the united states is, as has been abundantly apparent for the past six and one half years, an exercise in complete futility... the u.s. will not engage in principled foreign policy unless and until there are principled people placed in office... in the meantime, your energy would be better utilized in helping to find a way to get those people removed...
http://takeitpersonally.blogspot.com/
HI
We can't even ear mark money for US schools, but I do agree it woud be better than giving the blank check to the Army. I don't think GW will be helping the protestors.
jo6pac
I am mystified by the argument that Musharraf is some kind of U.S. ally in the "war" on "terror." Doesn't anybody remember that we terrorized him into being our ally? Does that make him a faithful friend? Refresh your memory with this clip from his 60 Minutes interview on the subject:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/21/60minutes/main2030165.shtml
Have Gun, Will Rule
Musharraf is bent upon ruling Pakistan because he has a gun in his hand and Bush & Chenye are backing him. The people of Pakistan be damned.
One the one hand US Administration tries to justify Iraqi occupation by saying it is bringing democracy to Iraq and on the other, it supports a military dictator who decimates democratic institutions, independent judiciary and rule of law.
The Pakistan Supreme Court was about to rule whether Musharraf could be a candidate for President for another term. According to the constitution Government employees are not allowed to contest elections within two years of retiring and Musharraf has not even retired yet. It was a forgone conclusion that Supreme Court will find Musharraf ineligible. Instead of stepping down quietly and handing over power to Senate Chairman, Musharraf has resorted to extreme and ultra constitutional steps.
How many people in the U.S. would stand for it if George Bush did this to the U.S. Supreme Court and its judges? No civilised society should stand for subversion of the highest courts, shredding of constitution and detention of judges, lawyers and politicians.
People of Pakistan have always complained that various U.S. Administrations develop friendships with their rulers & dictators and not with people of Pakistan. This has led to resentment and strong anti-American sentiment in the country. It is time that the ordinary citizens of United States impress upon their Administration to stand up against the rule of gun and express solidarity with people of Pakistan as they need and support to defeat a dictator.
Musharraf is not the only person in Pakistan who can help fight terror. The people of Pakistan are fed up with extremists and want to ensure that terrorism is brought to an end. This is better achieved through democratically elected leaders rather than through a military dictator.
The only way Musharraf will listen is if US Administartion insists that he immediately restore constitution, allow the Supreme Court to function with all its judges as before, withdraw emergency rule and release all lawyers, judges, politicians and other citizens.
The lawyer's movement is a fresh air in Pakistan's rotten politico-military culture. I hope they will be able to put military rule to rest forever. However, I am shocked to know that 50 out of 95 Pakistani top judges have taken Oath. I hope some of them have been forced to do that otherwise it is depressing but offcourse the movment speaks for itself.
Post a Comment
<< Home