Better Hope We Aren't Down-Wind of a Sewer When the Winds of Change Start Blowing
September 7th 2008 22:08
With the US political conventions absolutely dominating the political sphere for the past few weeks, it is perhaps time to remember that there are important things happening in the world that has nothing to do with Sarah Palin, Barack Obama or the November election. But there is one connection: the campaigns seemed to have converged on a theme of change. And their hypothetical change has been exemplified in practice by the people of Pakistan this week with the election of their new President. As you may or may not know, the military leader General Pervez Musharraf stepped down a few weeks ago under threat of impeachment after almost a decade at the top. What followed was a tail-spin of speculation as to who would take up the mantle. The thing with Pakistan is this: the years under Musharraf have led to a robust opposition movement that is made up of groups that don’t necessarily get along with each other most of the time. One of the times they did get along? When Asif Ali Zardari, leader of the Pakistan People’s Party, and Nawaz Sharif, leader of the Pakistan Muslim League, joined forces to give Musharraf the heave-ho. But in the power vacuum that followed, the question was which of the two men would take up his place as leader of a nation on the knife-edge of Western collaboration and Islamic extremism.
We got our answer with the election of Asif Ali Zardari on September 6. Even before the election, analysts had predicted a Zardari win would severely damage Pakistan’s economic and financial position in the world. So how did Asif Ali Zardari, who has spent much of his time over the past few decades in jail for corruption, get elected to the top job? Well, let’s call it a family affair. Zardari is the husband of former Pakistan’s People Party leader Benazir Bhutto, assassinated while on the campaign trail late in 2007. Bhutto was generally considered a shining light in Pakistani democracy, whose reputation was damaged by allegations of corruption levelled at her and her husband leading to her self-imposed exile. Her return to Pakistan in order to facilitate a power-sharing deal with Musharraf in 2007 came only months before her assassination and threw Asif Ali Zardari into the spotlight as the man, with their son Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, to lead the Pakistan People’s Party. That’s how a man generally considered laughably corrupt became the leader of one of Pakistan’s most popular political parties. And now he sits in the President’s chair. It’s a quick rise to the top in politics sometimes.
Now the stepping down of Musharraf and the rise of Zardari is an important event in its own right. But it is even more important when you take into consideration the importance of Pakistan in the continuing War on Terror and hunt for the remaining legions of al-Qaeda who are generally considered to be holed-up in the mountainous Waziristan border region between Pakistan and Afghanistan. With Musharraf there was a precarious balance inherent in the fight against terror. Musharraf was a firm ally and collaborator in the war in Afghanistan, while at the same time doing nothing to root out al-Qaeda and the Taliban in the border regions and allowing the flourishing of Islamic extremism under his watch. To many, Pakistan has been a poisoned chalice. On the one hand, it is a vitally important ally in any war against terrorism. It is the only Islamic nation with a nuclear weapon that could fall into the hands of extremists. It is geographically positioned in the middle of a hotbed of anti-Western sentiment. Without its continued support, al-Qaeda and the Taliban could set up shop somewhere new and another Afghanistan would be born. But on the other hand, it actively protects the very ones they are purportedly trying to help catch. Call it ideological sympathies. Call it making the best of a bad situation. But the fact is that Pakistan is complicit in fostering the continued safety of people like Osama bin Laden in the border region. The question is whether this will change under Asif Ali Zardari. And even more to the point: if it does change, will it change for the better or the worst?
It’s important to point out that Benazir Bhutto was a good friend to the West. She was killed, in part, for her friendship with Western nations. Following that logic, the election of her party and her husband should have the West heaving a sigh of relief. But as was said earlier: Zardari is incompetent as far as economic management is concerned. The Pakistani economy is already in a shambles and without a steady vision, it will only fail further. And when the economy fails, and living standards falls, it creates the perfect conditions for extremism to be born. The festering wound of Islamic extremism will grow and grow until Zardari has no control over it anymore. And when that happens, the Taliban and their al-Qaeda allies will march into Islamabad with their heads held high. Osama bin Laden will smile when he gets his hands on the nuclear launch codes. And people all over Western Europe, Israel and the United States of America will assume the position under their desks and in their closets. And they will wonder why we never did more to stop this happening.
The US election this year is about change. What they neglect to mention is that change isn’t enough. Because some change is good. And some is very, very bad.
We got our answer with the election of Asif Ali Zardari on September 6. Even before the election, analysts had predicted a Zardari win would severely damage Pakistan’s economic and financial position in the world. So how did Asif Ali Zardari, who has spent much of his time over the past few decades in jail for corruption, get elected to the top job? Well, let’s call it a family affair. Zardari is the husband of former Pakistan’s People Party leader Benazir Bhutto, assassinated while on the campaign trail late in 2007. Bhutto was generally considered a shining light in Pakistani democracy, whose reputation was damaged by allegations of corruption levelled at her and her husband leading to her self-imposed exile. Her return to Pakistan in order to facilitate a power-sharing deal with Musharraf in 2007 came only months before her assassination and threw Asif Ali Zardari into the spotlight as the man, with their son Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, to lead the Pakistan People’s Party. That’s how a man generally considered laughably corrupt became the leader of one of Pakistan’s most popular political parties. And now he sits in the President’s chair. It’s a quick rise to the top in politics sometimes.
Now the stepping down of Musharraf and the rise of Zardari is an important event in its own right. But it is even more important when you take into consideration the importance of Pakistan in the continuing War on Terror and hunt for the remaining legions of al-Qaeda who are generally considered to be holed-up in the mountainous Waziristan border region between Pakistan and Afghanistan. With Musharraf there was a precarious balance inherent in the fight against terror. Musharraf was a firm ally and collaborator in the war in Afghanistan, while at the same time doing nothing to root out al-Qaeda and the Taliban in the border regions and allowing the flourishing of Islamic extremism under his watch. To many, Pakistan has been a poisoned chalice. On the one hand, it is a vitally important ally in any war against terrorism. It is the only Islamic nation with a nuclear weapon that could fall into the hands of extremists. It is geographically positioned in the middle of a hotbed of anti-Western sentiment. Without its continued support, al-Qaeda and the Taliban could set up shop somewhere new and another Afghanistan would be born. But on the other hand, it actively protects the very ones they are purportedly trying to help catch. Call it ideological sympathies. Call it making the best of a bad situation. But the fact is that Pakistan is complicit in fostering the continued safety of people like Osama bin Laden in the border region. The question is whether this will change under Asif Ali Zardari. And even more to the point: if it does change, will it change for the better or the worst?
It’s important to point out that Benazir Bhutto was a good friend to the West. She was killed, in part, for her friendship with Western nations. Following that logic, the election of her party and her husband should have the West heaving a sigh of relief. But as was said earlier: Zardari is incompetent as far as economic management is concerned. The Pakistani economy is already in a shambles and without a steady vision, it will only fail further. And when the economy fails, and living standards falls, it creates the perfect conditions for extremism to be born. The festering wound of Islamic extremism will grow and grow until Zardari has no control over it anymore. And when that happens, the Taliban and their al-Qaeda allies will march into Islamabad with their heads held high. Osama bin Laden will smile when he gets his hands on the nuclear launch codes. And people all over Western Europe, Israel and the United States of America will assume the position under their desks and in their closets. And they will wonder why we never did more to stop this happening.
The US election this year is about change. What they neglect to mention is that change isn’t enough. Because some change is good. And some is very, very bad.
| 39 |
| Vote |
