Musharraf resigns, world does not end

[Androsphinx]

Graniud

Pakistan's president, Pervez Musharraf, today announced his resignation after robustly defending his record.

Expectations that the former army chief and firm US ally would go had been mounting since the coalition government, led by the party of the assassinated former prime minister Benazir Bhutto, said this month it planned to impeach him.

In a televised address to the nation, he defended his decision to impose emergency rule late last year, claiming his political opponents would have made matters worse for Pakistan.

He said Pakistan had always been his priority, and that he had imposed emergency rule in order to save the country from crisis.

Musharraf said his policies had improved the economy and women's rights, and laid the ground for democracy.

"People have said my policies over the past nine years have been wrong - they were wrong," said Musharraf. "My critics must not make things worse for Pakistan.

"Some elements acting for vested interests have made false allegations against me. Everything I have done will have long-term benefits for Pakistan."

Musharraf, who seized power in a 1999 coup but has been largely sidelined since his rivals won parliamentary elections in February, had for months resisted calls on him to resign.

I'd just note that by leaving it so late, and being so obstructionist, he doesn't seem to have managed to get the immunity deal he might well need to avoid prison.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Hurrah. Another "US ally" has its leader quit, for reasons similar to why Philippines' Marcos and others had to resign.

As for Musharraf, any takers that he might be granted "asylum" in the US?

[Shroom Man 777]

Hurrah. Another "US ally" has its leader quit, for reasons similar to why Philippines' Marcos and others had to resign.

Don't be so harsh!

In 1981 Vice President George Bush seemed to signal a different approach when in his visit to Manila he told Marcos, "We love your adherence to democratic principles and to democratic processes."

As for Musharraf, any takers that he might be granted "asylum" in the US?

Hawaii!

[Keevan_Colton]

As for Musharraf, any takers that he might be granted "asylum" in the US?

Hawaii!

There has got to be a sitcom in that somewhere...

[Shroom Man 777]

Well, that's where Marcos ended up. Then he had a tube stuck into his throat, and then he died. Then his body got preserved.

Oh, and they found bars of gold in his luggage.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Well, that's where Marcos ended up. Then he had a tube stuck into his throat, and then he died. Then his body got preserved.

Oh, and they found bars of gold in his luggage.

I think they are still trying to hunt down more gold?

[Keevan_Colton]

Well, that's where Marcos ended up. Then he had a tube stuck into his throat, and then he died. Then his body got preserved.

Oh, and they found bars of gold in his luggage.

I think they are still trying to hunt down more gold?

See, there is a sitcom there...with a retirement home for all the dictators the US supported...and the staff trying to trick them into telling them where they're hiding the money...and an occasional attempt by some well meaning European to sneak in and bring them to account.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

See, there is a sitcom there...with a retirement home for all the dictators the US supported...and the staff trying to trick them into telling them where they're hiding the money...and an occasional attempt by some well meaning European to sneak in and bring them to account.

And to hunt down all the shoes the dictator bought for his wife!

[Shroom Man 777]

I think they are still trying to hunt down more gold?

Well, not exactly gold, but I am certain that there are (a lot of) unaccounted for monies.

That gold bars in the luggage thing was found by US custom guys, IIRC.

Anyway, just how kleptocratic was Musharaf's rule? Just how bad was he?

For some, he seems to be like a decent guy who's only a dictator for "the good of the (savage Muslim) people" who "don't know any better" and so he's "saving them from themselves" and from electing an Ayatollah (or Rock and Rollah) or something. He even appeared on The Daily Show.

Then again, I think the same could be said for other dictators. America supports them cause "the ignorant brown people" over there would no doubt "elect someone worse" and with that flimsy justification, rich old white men everywhere can sleep easy knowing that they... uhh... protected freedom and stuff.


Is Musharaf even married? 'Cause, the Marcoses totally had, like, the world's biggest collection of shoes. And they're totally in the record books for the world's biggest heist and all - stealing from an entire country!

Fingolfin, remember that "Mt. Shepmore" Stas posted back in SDN World? That was actually Marcos' face, built on some mountain somewhere.

[Keevan_Colton]

To be honest, Musharraf wasnt that bad. Compared to most US backed dictators a veritable paragon of virtue. Then again, he didnt have very firm control over a lot of stuff, Pakistan's intelligence community and Al Qaeda are very hard to draw definite lines between.

Compared to some of the others that could be in charge of a country with confirmed nuclear weapons, he wasnt bad.

[FSTargetDrone]

Is Musharaf even married? 'Cause, the Marcoses totally had, like, the world's biggest collection of shoes. And they're totally in the record books for the world's biggest heist and all - stealing from an entire country!

Indeed he is:

Mrs. Laura Bush speaks with Mrs. Sehba Musharraf, wife of President Pervez Musharraf, during their meeting at Aiwan-e-Sadr, Saturday, March 4, 2006 in Islamabad, Pakistan.

[Sarevok]

Musharref was downright an angel compared to other nutcases that ruled Pakistan. His personal life is probably as corruption free as it could get in that part of the world. But on the other hand the man had a messiah complex it seems. He just won't quit - in his mind only he could save Pakistan. Which would have been a convincing argument if he could actually do that. But in trying to secure his power so he could "save" the country he just made too many internal and external threats to Pakistan. If he was to be considered a "good" dictator then he was ultimately a not so competent "good" dictator.

[Stargate Nerd]

I'd just note that by leaving it so late, and being so obstructionist, he doesn't seem to have managed to get the immunity deal he might well need to avoid prison.

Would that immunity really have any meaning?

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

I'd just note that by leaving it so late, and being so obstructionist, he doesn't seem to have managed to get the immunity deal he might well need to avoid prison.

Would that immunity really have any meaning?

He is quite likely to be chargeable for illegally declaring marshal law. However, I am not too fluent with Pakistani law.

That said, I have a good feeling that he is quite capable of escaping prosecution.

[Androsphinx]

I'd just note that by leaving it so late, and being so obstructionist, he doesn't seem to have managed to get the immunity deal he might well need to avoid prison.

Would that immunity really have any meaning?

I don't see why it wouldn't. Any successor of Musharraf will need to keep the army onside, and they wouldn't be very happy if the deal was reneged upon.

[Admiral Valdemar]

Better he did it this way than the almost Apocalyptic vision of coup that we had during the New Year. I'm impressed that he managed to stay on even this long.

With Musharraf gone, it's one last loyal poodle propping up the "War of Terror" the US started all those years ago.

[Androsphinx]

Better he did it this way than the almost Apocalyptic vision of coup that we had during the New Year. I'm impressed that he managed to stay on even this long.

With Musharraf gone, it's one last loyal poodle propping up the "War of Terror" the US started all those years ago.

The irony is that at the same time that this undermines the WoT, the way in which it was accomplished - the undermining of autocracy by democratic parties, defence of judicial independence, more-or-less peaceful protest and rejection of religious extremism - are precisely those things which the US has been trying to bring about elsewhere. It's certainly one of the best moments for the western liberal tradition in the last decade.

[Sriad]

Better he did it this way than the almost Apocalyptic vision of coup that we had during the New Year. I'm impressed that he managed to stay on even this long.

With Musharraf gone, it's one last loyal poodle propping up the "War of Terror" the US started all those years ago.

The irony is that at the same time that this undermines the WoT, the way in which it was accomplished - the undermining of autocracy by democratic parties, defence of judicial independence, more-or-less peaceful protest and rejection of religious extremism - are precisely those things which the US has been trying to bring about elsewhere. It's certainly one of the best moments for the western liberal tradition in the last decade.

Yes, I see it as a rare bit of good news. In the final accounting, he stepped down as head of armed forces in Pakistan, and then as President (even though it took long enough) rather than attempting populist wealth redistribution and maneuvering into a President For Life position unlike certain other Robert Mugabe who will remain nameless.

This is (and hopefully will remain) the most peaceful and orderly transition of power in Pakistan in 50 years. For that, and for easing of tensions with India he will probably be remembered well... now that he's released his death-grip on power.

[Stormbringer]

The irony is that at the same time that this undermines the WoT, the way in which it was accomplished - the undermining of autocracy by democratic parties, defence of judicial independence, more-or-less peaceful protest and rejection of religious extremism - are precisely those things which the US has been trying to bring about elsewhere. It's certainly one of the best moments for the western liberal tradition in the last decade.

I wouldn't necessarily call it one of the best moments of the western liberal tradition just yet. A lot of it will hinge on what comes after Musharraf and most of the "opposition" are self-serving, venal kleptocrats. It's good to see this not go down in the potential bloody coup that seemed to loom but with out a good, stable government following it's a hollow thing. The real test is yet to come.

[Pelranius]

It's also entirely possible he could go away to China. They like him pretty well over there as well.

He was one "our" better dictators I guess, to echo everyone else.

[SirNitram]

Do not fret. China is not required! The Neocons have a solution!

KRISTOL: My view is this — President Bush needs to give President Pervez Musharraf asylum, give him instant citizenship, and then Obama can put him on the ticket for vice president.

That's not actually legal.(Same reason I can't be Vice Prez; must be 'natural born' citizen.)

[Androsphinx]

The irony is that at the same time that this undermines the WoT, the way in which it was accomplished - the undermining of autocracy by democratic parties, defence of judicial independence, more-or-less peaceful protest and rejection of religious extremism - are precisely those things which the US has been trying to bring about elsewhere. It's certainly one of the best moments for the western liberal tradition in the last decade.

I wouldn't necessarily call it one of the best moments of the western liberal tradition just yet. A lot of it will hinge on what comes after Musharraf and most of the "opposition" are self-serving, venal kleptocrats. It's good to see this not go down in the potential bloody coup that seemed to loom but with out a good, stable government following it's a hollow thing. The real test is yet to come.

It's very depressing how few such moments there are to choose from in recent years! Your point is very much on my mind - and it's far from clear that the interests of western liberalism and Pakistanis are identical.

[The Grim Squeaker]

The irony is that at the same time that this undermines the WoT, the way in which it was accomplished - the undermining of autocracy by democratic parties, defence of judicial independence, more-or-less peaceful protest and rejection of religious extremism - are precisely those things which the US has been trying to bring about elsewhere. It's certainly one of the best moments for the western liberal tradition in the last decade.

I wouldn't necessarily call it one of the best moments of the western liberal tradition just yet. A lot of it will hinge on what comes after Musharraf and most of the "opposition" are self-serving, venal kleptocrats. It's good to see this not go down in the potential bloody coup that seemed to loom but with out a good, stable government following it's a hollow thing. The real test is yet to come.

It's very depressing how few such moments there are to choose from in recent years! Your point is very much on my mind - and it's far from clear that the interests of western liberalism and Pakistanis are identical.

As opposed to when, the timeframe when the US proped up dictators, or overthrew dictators to put their own (even more corrupt) alternatives in. Or perhaps the days of divide and conquer imperialism and tribes .
(Not arguing pro or for, just commenting on my dislike of "good old days nonsense".
PS, about that PM...)

[Androsphinx]

In those dark days, every step forward was a great victory. Now, after the euphoria of the End of History, our triumphs are diminished.

Besides, you're thinking about this in terms of foreign policy. Liberalism only ever wins on a domestic level (with the possible exception of the Royal Navy's anti-slavery campaign).

(PS - I'm off to NY tomorrow, so will b"n think about it on the plane and get back to you soon)