 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Musharraf’s juicy stories |
AT any point of time, London acts as a ‘safe haven’ - mostly in the name of political asylum - for some two thousand fugitives from justice. If and when convicted (highly unlikely to be tried in the first place) Pervez Musharraf, like most of them, may remain beyond the reach of Pakistani law. As national politics tends to evolve and our friends in the desert kingdom have revived their interest in ensuring Pakistan’s political stability, the retired General has nothing to fear. But we would advise him to hold his tongue and rest his body. Let history give its verdict. After all, Idi Amin, Ferdinand Marcos and the Shah of Iran also escaped trials in their countries and quietly descended in the dustbin of history. But that doesn’t seem to be the case with him as if he is itching for ‘martyrdom’. Given the ambivalence permeating the corridors of power in the twin-cities of Islamabad and Rawalpindi, he may be spared a trial for treason for violating the Constitution, a fact established by the Supreme Court’s July-31 landmark verdict. But what to do if he has, this time violated the oath of his office, as president of Pakistan, by revealing some vital state secrets, or by misstating facts causing irreparable damage to national interests. In his interview, aired by a private TV channel, Pervez Musharraf has said two new things that, irrespective of being true or otherwise, tend to seriously undermine national security. First, he said, in so many words, that Pakistan has used the arms, supplied by the United States to combat terrorism, to strengthen defence against India. And as if to lend credibility to his assertion, Musharraf then boasted he “did not care” whether the US would be angered by his disclosure. Of course, the Americans would not be angry with him for that all that he has done for them in their war on terror, but the Pakistanis should be. The reason is obvious. For quite some time Pakistani leadership has been asking the United States for sophisticated weapons and technology, including drone technology, for more effective action against terrorists and militants in the tribal Wild West.
But the US has dithered, believing Pakistan would deploy these weapons on its eastern border with India. With the ex-president now disclosing that earlier such military aid was diverted away from the war on terror, what possibility is now left to get such sophisticated arms from United States? The other dangerous disclosure Pervez Musharraf has made, through his interview, is the claim that during his tenure, Pakistan’s nuclear programme was ‘so advanced that scientists had not only begun enriching uranium, but had also developed plutonium-based weapons’. Intriguingly, Pervez Musharraf’s disclosure that Pakistan has plutonium-based weapons comes only a week after Indian Army Chief Deepak Kapoor’s statement that ‘if reports of Pakistan’s expanded nuclear arsenal are correct, India may have to revisit India’s no-first use policy’. It is intriguing also because Musharraf’s revelation of an active plutonium programme is bound to undercut Pakistan’s position at the forthcoming UN Security Council-sponsored anti-proliferation conference where President Obama is expected to interact with global nuclear stakeholders. Hasn’t he violated his constitutional oath of office by making such a disclosure? As for Pakistan’s foreign policy, in these testing times Pervez Musharraf is acting like a bull in a china shop. By lapping up log, stock and barrel the United States’ anti-Taliban policy in the region he has already done tremendous damage to Pakistan; hardly anything is left for his further tinkering. That he handed over the airbases of Shamsi and Jacobabad to Americans as appeasement, otherwise they would have attacked Pakistan - appears to be far-fetched. Much smaller countries have defied US imperialism much more bravely. Not that the world’s fifth largest army could not defend Pakistan’s borders. Pervez Musharraf had capitulated to receive, in return, US parental care and above all legitimisation of his coup against an elected government by Western powers. What the Pakistani nation inherited as his legacy, he need not tell us; we experience that on a daily basis. We would urge him to hold his tongue. He has said enough. He has said enough rude things. But if at all he feels he has a juicy story to tell, let him come over and contest what the apex court of Pakistan has decided about him.
|
| |
|
A year of economic meltdown |
WHILE no single fact or event caused the global financial crisis, the collapse of US investment bank Lehman Brothers one year ago today proved a fateful catalyst. Lehman was a 168-year-old Wall Street institution, and with assets of $639 billion, its bankruptcy was the largest in US history. The bank’s demise, more than anything else, is seen as the point of no return for the misery we know now as the Great Recession. It’s easy to forget that signs of trouble were emerging well before Lehman died. US home prices were already falling from their peak in 2006, and the American economy had begun shrinking in early 2008. Consumer demand was slipping worldwide, and the spike in oil prices to $147 a barrel during the summer of 2008 flagged a rise in inflation. But it was the failure of last-ditch efforts to find a buyer for an insolvent Lehman that spawned planetary financial panic and, in short order, to the world’s worst recession since World War II. Washington rescued AIG, the world’s largest insurer, but Citicorp, UBS and other banking titans started to totter. Liquidity froze, industrial output plummeted, and world trade withered by a fifth in just the three months ending January.
Unlike their counterparts in the 1930s, leaders of the world’s most powerful nations responded to the disaster by pulling together in a coordinated effort to slash interest rates and inject sick banks with cash, staving off an even worse ?catastrophe. Although unemployment is high and getting worse in some places, major economies from China to Germany to the US are once again showing some spark. Economists, including Nouriel Roubini — a Cassandra who foresaw the meltdown — say any recovery will be long and painful, in part because households addicted to living beyond their means must chip away at mountains of debt. But the path to recovery is at last clear. Among the outcomes from this turbulent history is the discrediting of US-style laissez-faire capitalism. China’s model of highly centralised control is now in the ascendant, even in some corners of Washington. Lehman Brothers collapsed, it can be argued, due largely to weak regulation and oversight of financial markets. President Barack Obama’s team is working hard to plug this hole and keep the storm-tossed US economic ship afloat. Perhaps an even worthier legacy of the Lehman debacle is that more people are taking to heart the simple advice of US statesman and inventor Benjamin Franklin, more than two centuries ago: “Spend less than you earn”.
—Khaleej Times
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
