Benazir Bhutto had said that she would hoist the
national at the residence of CJP few days before conspirators and murderers made sure to take her life away on Dec 27.
Had she been alive as an astute politician she was, she would have certainly kept her promise to reinstate judges who were sent home through an illegal and unconstitutional order under the garb of emergency imposed on Nov 3 last year.
Asif Ali Zardari in a tactical move took over the reins of PPP while the people were mourning the murder of his wife .The members of the central committee of PPP had not yet cushioned the shock of BB’s murder, when they were asked to propose the name of her successor. In that moment of grief and anguish, Zardari’s son was nominated as successor to Benazir Bhutto and Zardari himself becoming de facto leader of PPP. Not only that Zardari announced franchise of Bhutto family by adding “ Bhutto” to names of his children because he knew that PPP members would not accept any leader unless he carried the name of Bhutto family.
PML(N) contested the polls only on one agenda - restoration of judges and it took oath from its newly elected members that they would restore the judges .Zardari engaged in negotiations with his “ elder brother “, Nawaz Sharief on the issue of reinstatement of judges who were illegally removed by Musharraf. Keeping in view public pressure the main agreement between Zardari and Nawaz Shareif was that the judges would be restored in by April 30.But the nation got a rude shock when Zardari performed a somersault by reneging from his public commitment saying that announcement from Burban was only a political statement not a Hadees (holy scripture).In the elections PMLN) emerged as second largest party causing unease in the President’s camp. The President’s Attorney General Malik Qayyum instead of advocating the government case on a petition opposed mandatory BA condition for eligibility to contest election. The speed and alacrity with which the apex court heard and gave verdict in this petition by a person whose antecedents are not known is amazing and certainly raises questions about the important institution of the state .This directly benefited Zardari who does not have a degree.
President Musharraf showered many favors on Zardariand made him the second richest man(worth $1.8 billion) in Pakistan by promulgating the most abominable law called National Reconciliation Ordinance. Zardari is one of the major beneficiaries of this law.
In interviews Zardari has given vent to his grouse against the Chif Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry that he did not give him any relief meaning thereby how he could reinstate such a judge. Such line of thinking does not go well with the person who is now heading Z A Bhutto’s party who never compromised with dictators even when he was handed down death sentence .It is a travesty of facts that in February 18 elections Zardari's party won elections on ZA Bhutto’s slogan of ‘Roti’, ‘Kapra’ aur ‘Makaan” (bread, cloths and shelter), and his party didn’t obtain seats on the slogan of judges’ restoration. It is pathetic to say the least that judges were only interested in securing their jobs, conveniently ignoring a year long struggle by lawyers and members of civil society in all the four provinces. Being beholden to Musharraf for so many favors he can not afford to bring a motion in the assembly for impeachment of the President and restore the judges the way Nawaz Shareif promised during the election campaign. Though Zardari has called Musharraf as a relic of the past but in reality he does not want him to go and keep CJP Iftikhar away from the supreme court.
His digression from the Burban Accord caused frustration and dismay in the PML (N) which still wanted to believe that an agreement with Zardari was possible. Meetings held in Dubai and London failed to unlock the dead lock because the PPP was not interested in restoring the CJP Itfikhar Cahudhry. As soon as PPP’s talks broke down with PML (N) , the US Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher descended in London for debriefings. Earlier the American Ambassador in Islamabad also met MQM leader Altaf Hussain in London. When Nawaz Shareif was having meetings with Zardari in London the same day American Ambassador was visiting Nine Zero in Karachi. America wants PPP to allow Musharraf to continue as President and no restorations of judge’s .The USA feels that in the absence of Musharraf the war against terrorism would come to a halt or if pursued it would be lack luster. The dead lock in meetings held in London between leaders of PPP and PML(N) London has caused disappointment and embarrassment for PML (N) which had contested the polls on the issue of restoration of judges .It has ,therefore, pulled its ministers out of the government. A PML (N) leader told me that it would not be easy to unseat them in Punjab given their numbers in the provincial assembly .But they should recall that it happened before when Watto with who had the support of only 16 MPA’s was installed as chief minister of Punjab .So Nawaz Sharief should be on his tender- hooks about the next move of the establishment.
MQM and PPP which were once at daggers drawn have become coalition partners in Send following an understanding ‘you forgive our murderers and we forgive yours”. No questions would now be asked for carnage of May 12 and explosion of October 18 last year from the then ruling party, MQM. But Zardari would be faced with political turmoil if lawyers and members of civil society launch a campaign in Punjab with PML (N) in the driving seat. The struggle by lawyers had sent ripples across the entire country and how it would take off again remains to be seen. The secret hands which never remained dormant would try to create a wedge between ranks of lawyer’s organizations. The lawyers and members of civil society made innumerable sacrifices for reinstatement of sacked judges now feel betrayed particularly by PPP which turned out to be the only obstacle for restoring the 60 judges and truly independent judiciary . Coming days are of crucial importance and it is possible that PML (N) head Nawaz Sharief may decide to place his own resolution in the assembly for reinstatement of judges which would not only be an embarrassment for rest of parties but also thoroughly expose them before the people. Till Musharraf goes and judges are restored the nation would continue to ride on a roller coaster.

Zanaflex free prescription

I am sure that everybody knows that Benazir Bhutto was a reputed belly dancer before she entered politics. She is Harvard and Oxford educated, and a bellydancer which makes her a magnet of attraction. She has lots of stuff !

Watch this youtube video showingb Bhutto bellydancing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SltOELuotI

What was started by the late Gen. Zia shapes the landscape of Pakistan to this day. He was the godfather of fundamentalists. He brought those draconian laws. He marginalized minorities and the majority(women). Under President Musharaf, a lot of good things has happend to Pakistan. However, he could not fully entangle himself from Zia's baggage. He, maybe for not rocking the boat too much(he is a cautious fellow), did not do the necessary work of purging the low-rank officer-core and the intelligence from extremist' sympathisers. Not even after the attempts on his own life. Now, the situation is very delicate. Ms. Bhutto cannot do much either if the army would not cooperate with her in purging the forces from the secret admirers of jihadis. At times, they turned a blind eyes to activities of Taleban, thinking this would be good for ethnic relations within Pakistan. This, however, turned out to be a major miscalculation. However, there is hope: the majority of Pakistanies are life loving and peaceful people.

Dear Sir Ahmed Rashid Article is based on ground realities. Musharraf prsently has become stooges of his sycophants around him. He has degraded army as well by pitting it against own people who are as good or bad Pakistis as Musharraf. It is now difficult for him to escape the critical situation safely. He is hated among the public. Benazir has also dropped her popularity by cuttinn deal with Musharraf. Now there will be manipulation in the upcoming general elections with malafide intention to return the same corrupt leaders who are in support of the General.You are invited to read the following pragraghs to know the real situation in tribal areas. Army is loosing badly in operation against tribes of FATA.

Discrimination may lead to Disintegration

Muslims of Bengal founded Muslim League in 1906 with an aim to break hegemony of Hindus over the Muslims of sub-continent. The league launched a movement to gather all Muslims on its platform. It met grand success when under the leadership of Quad-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah Pakistan emerged as an independent Muslim state.

In July, 1947 a referendum was held in NWFP which resulted into accession of the province to Pakistan. In November 1947, tribal elders opted to attach Tribal Agencies to Pakistan. People of Northern Areas won independence at their own and in Aug, 1948 joined with Pakistan. In 1948, Kalat merged with Pakistan when the Khan signed the necessary merger documents. Gawader was purchased from Sultan of Oman in 1958. This was the final shape of then West Pakistan which is still in tact.

After independence, a campaign of hatred against East Pakistanis was started. They were called rice and fish eaters and it was said that they produce more children. It was also said they spoke loud for their rights. This discriminatory attitude of West Pakistanis against their East Pakistani brothers was not corrected by our leaders and disliking for each other reached climax. In 1970, when Mujib-ur-Reman was elected as Prime Minister our army Generals in collusion with Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto refused to hand over the government to Mujib-ur-Rehman just for the reason that he was Bengali. Consequently Bengalis who created Pakistan had to make their separate country Bangladesh, although with heavy heart. Our Generals who always claim that they impose Martial Law to save the country from disintegration surrendered and whole nation suffered humiliation.

During General Zia regime, Indians took possession of Saichen Area. Our Generals were so negligent that they came to know when Indians had already consolidated their positions. Our generals have not been able to get that area back so far.

Presently Musharraf preaches that he is indispensable for Pakistan’s existence. On the other hand he has deployed army in FATA for killing citizens who are part and parcel of Pakistan. Allegations against them are that they are extremist and medieval type people and give shelter to foreigners. However, the government has not shown to the public any foreigner captured by the army personnel during operation.

General Musharraf has not learnt any lesson from the history. Situation like East Pakistan has been created in tribal areas. Air and artillery bombardment on innocent people including females and children has failed to subjugate the tribes. Their houses have been dismantled and they are migrating in their own home land. Musharraf is degrading army by ordering it to kill own citizens. He should know loyalties of people are won with social justice and giving them opportunities of participation in social and political life at equality basis. Discrimination always leads to disintegration. Unity of command and giving pardon to criminals is no solution to redress problems of the poor people. If army operation continues, tribal areas will not remain as part of Pakistan. Group of corrupt supporters around him will laugh over and quit him alone to face the music. US will also leave him once its agenda is complete.

Gangly Khan
Mandi Bahauddin
Pakistan

Were Bhutto to replace Musharraf, precisely what would change? The pieces of the patronage pie might shift, but would the schools improve? Would more women learn to read or have a better chance at asserting rights? Wouldn't the situation in the tribal regions or Kashmir remain essentially the same? So far as the military goes, isn't it a case of "same difference"? Most of the writings about Pakistani politics are uninstructive, merely chatter about respective "in" and "out" groups.

Key ailments Pakistan is suffering from are:

1. Population growth, largely unfettered - no government since Ayub Khan's "family planning" initiative in the 1960s has even made an honest effort to curb the growth rate;
2. Illiteracy, even amongst the "degreed" - educational institutions where the majority of Pakistanis register are, in the main, much like inner-city schools in this country; i.e., quite broken;
3. Unemployment or near-unemployment - picture an unshapely and bloated pyramid where the top is disproportionately narrow and the lower part is burgeoning. Income gap between the haves and have-nots continues to increase; and last, but not least,
4. The West's thirst for, and dependency upon, oil has made Pakistan a strategic land mass (bordering Afghanistan, Iran, India, China, and the Persian Gulf) which must be kept within the West's sphere of influence lest the wheels come off the military-industrial complex's gravy train.

Given the above, it is no surprise that:

- Religion has assumed an increasingly important role in the lives of the Pakistani masses and has been exploited by radical extremists and moderates alike. Indeed, it is the one weapon - sadly - that has proven to be somewhat effective at countering the West's unchallenged march under the "globalization" banner;
- The massive allocation of precious resources (including billions of dollars of aid from the West) devoted to the armed services in Pakistan serves to undermine precisely what it seeks to protect; i.e., the Pakistani nation. The ailments described above require "out-of-the-box" thinking and focused attention on the general welfare of the public, not on military spending;
- Democratic institutions will not take hold in a country where the burdens for an average family are so onerous; and, frankly, an honest, dedicated dictatorship can build the required edifice more effectively and efficiently than the necessarily evolutionary nature of democracy (China, Korea, Malaysia are good examples).

In my opinion, whether it's Musharraf-Benazir or Benazir-Sharif or any other such combination, nothing of import will be achieved in the near-term unless the government is honest, forceful, and committed to nothing but the welfare of the downtrodden masses. And, I'm afraid, I'm not sanguine about the prospects, even with the lesser of evils (Musharraf-Benazir).

Would it be asking for too much of the Army, America, and Allah to have a change of heart and do what's best for the Pakistani citizen?

- Babar Shameem (Silver Spring, Maryland)

Bhutto is known as the most corrupt and self centric leader in Pakistan and Europe. she bears no love for Pakistan.
Yes she returns to Pakistan under a guaranteed US protection umbrella and once again; to leave this country plundered and looted.
A state of the art robot duly rebuilt in US to deliver US hegemony and agenda in this area.

We all know Saddam Hussein. He was a loyal US proxy who can be graded as second to none. He fought 8 long years war of attrition against Iran and millions were made to perish in both Iran and Iraq. We all know; how he met his fate. Musharraf in Pakistan is another proxy who upheld US given agenda of; ‘US war on terror’. He is also being declared now as a spent cartridge and supposed to be ditched by implanting yet another proxy; Benazir Bhutto.

God save the destitute and poor Muslim inhabitants of this ill fated land of South East Asia. Only if these proxies (leaders) if they know that they will find themselves (always) abandoned, disgraced and dishonoured by US? In turn; they loose their rein as well as their land at the hands of US, when some how start sliding down from the top of their curve and surely; then Gallows are waiting at the end.

I believe Musharaf is the best thing that has happened to Pakistan. The economy is growing. It is unfortunate that intellectuals in Pakistan have not seen the bright side of his efforts and did not give him the space to go ahead with modernising Pakistan. Why is Democracy so dear to intellectuals in our age? What has democracy given to Pakistan? Rougue and corrupt leaders?
Nations need strong people who can bring useful difference in people's life. Democracy need not be the best solution to all our problems.

Scholars have long argued about the compatibility of Islam and democracy. Statistical models have brought out the relationship between Islam and democracy. In all but the poorest countries, Islam is associated with few political rights.

Four studies use the "political rights" variable of Freedom House and the "democracy" variable of Colorado State University professors Monty G. Marshall and Keith Jaggers in their Polity IV data sets.

Data included are per capita gross domestic product (GDP) with data supplied by the World Bank. While some previous studies considered per capita GDP in a linear fashion, this may miss certain relationships. Those countries in Europe, North America, as well as Japan, South Korea, and Australia, which belong to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, are all industrialized. They vary in per capita GDP although they maintain similar political rights. To minimize this difficulty, Donno, Russett, and Ross all used the logarithm of per capita GDP.

The studies explores differences in democracy among "very poor," "poor," and "medium/high income" nations. These categories are based on their 2000 per capita GDP compared to the same year's U.S. per capita GDP. "Very poor" nations had a per capita GDP of less than 15 percent of the U.S. figure while "poor" nations had a per capita GDP of less than 25 percent, and the medium/high income nations had a per capita GDP greater than 25 percent of that of the United States

The study sample includes 162 countries of which 39 have a Muslim majority. The "Muslim variable" in this study is the percentage of Muslims in the population rather than an artificial variable of either zero or one, which statisticians use to indicate whether any country's population reaches an arbitrarily assigned proportion of Muslims

The inescapable conclusion is that the greater the percentage of Muslims in the population, the lower are the political rights in the country.

This Muslim variable is not, however, statistically significant when the very poor nations in the sample are examined separately. Such a result makes sense.

Citizens of very poor nations often enjoy few rights to begin with, and so Islam does not have much room to create a downward impact.

For the entire sample, the countries with an Arab culture also have lower political rights than other Muslim nations although in the other results with different sub-samples, there is not an indication of such a relationship.

The correlations also support previous work that shows a positive correlation between political rights and per capita income but a negative relationship both between the relative importance of raw material exports and whether the nation currently has a communist government.

For example, most countries which derive the bulk of their income from oil exports suffer in political freedoms. Communist countries such as China, Cuba, and North Korea also do not compare well in political freedoms with many other states.

Other concrete examples illustrate the statistical results. Among pairs of oil exporting states with roughly the same per capita GDP, one predominantly Muslim, the other not, the Muslim country compares unfavorably with the non-Muslim state.

For instance, Algeria is less democratic than Gabon; Syria has fewer political freedoms than Sri Lanka, and even Iran does not compare well to Venezuela. Of the 58 nations classified as having medium or high per capita GDP, only the 6 Gulf Cooperation Council states—Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and United Arab Emirates—are Muslim. These 6 countries have an average political freedom score roughly one third that of the remaining 52 nations in this group. When their oil exports are taken into account, they score roughly half that of the other nations.

There are some exceptions to the general conclusion that Islam has a negative impact on political rights.

In the sample of 39 predominantly Muslim countries, Bangladesh, Mali, Senegal, and Turkey have political freedom scores in the middle range.

Even more perplexing, the first three are found among the "very poor nations" where low political rights are the norm. Whether these poor Muslim countries can maintain their democratic edge as they develop economically is unclear since this edge depends on the intricate interactions between Islamist and democratic forces during modernization.

The constitutional crisis surrounding the aborted May 2007 presidential elections in Turkey and speculation about military interference provides an example of the uncertainties of democracy in a developing Muslim nation. The parliamentary elections in July 2007, however, proceeded smoothly, and relative calm prevailed in the first few weeks afterwards.

Some critics might object to the general conclusion about the deficit in political rights in Muslim countries because exact results differ somewhat across models, and moreover, are dependent upon the quality of data used in the calculations. Nevertheless, in statistical experiments not reported here that use smaller samples of nations having more reliable data, the major conclusion about the negative relationship between Islam and political rights does not change.

Similarly, experiments using other explanatory variables such as population heterogeneity did not change the general conclusions. Interestingly, although Islam has a considerable influence on the polity, it has had relatively little impact on the economy.

The empirical results do not answer the question of why Muslim states usually have fewer political rights than non-Muslim countries. In part, historical factors are responsible.

Islam found root primarily in countries with low per capita GDPs and a deficit of political rights. But Islamic doctrine also places little emphasis on individual rights, especially by those Muslim sects such as the Shi‘a whose leaders have stressed a theocratic approach toward government.

Although the leaders of some Muslim nations have severed the bonds between mosque and state, many of these same rulers still maintained the politically repressive traditions of their countries to enhance their own power.

Three additional conclusions appear clear. The causes underlying the deficits in political freedom in most Islamic nations can only be disentangled by a detailed analysis of the special features of each nation.

Moreover, this democracy deficit is likely to remain for many years in the future. Finally, the fact that some predominantly Muslim nations have relatively respectable degrees of political freedom suggests that this deficit may not be a permanent condition. These conclusions imply, in turn, that exporting democracy to the Middle East or other Muslim countries may not be impossible but will certainly have a very distant horizon.

stop blaming the americans for your failures.
pakistans main problem is its stupid hanging on to fanatic ideas. get a grip and keep stupid religion out of the story and u will have a better life.
god ? dont care if u r amuslim or a christian or a jew or even a monkey cause there is no god. u got to do what u got to do. get rid of the army and the maulvis, and life will smile on u.

as pakistanis we are not fit to be a democracy yet,
we have along way to go. Half of the nation is uneducated and cannot even read or write thier own names.

what we need to do is close the borders for 20 years and start from zero. we need new blood and brains to make a new pakistan, where true freedom will exist. freedom of religion should be put on the top of the list. gettin rid of the stupid mullahs is the first thing that should be done. there is no other way. all the rest is B.S. One idiot will come to the power seat and another idiot will
leave the power seat. this will go on forever.
lets get together and wash our country from top to toe.
thats why they call it pakistan dont they?
is pakistan pak? No its is filthy.

The american agenda for this region is very simply to divide and rule, for reasons known to everyone who wishes to acknowledge the truth. Mushraf's agenda for (t)his country is very simply to divide and rule, so that the americans can further therir agenda. These games will continue, benazir and nawaz will come and go, people will die, mujahedin (ooppps!) militants will continue to resist the american agenda. so what, history repeats itself, until......
question is, where do mr rashid's loyalities lie, with the american agenda or with (t)his country?

Mr Rashid knows quite well what was it like in Pakistan under the leadership of Ms.Bhutto. I know well as my family business had to dollout 10% of the contract price of each Goverment tender that we filled, to these crooks.Not only that Every Goverment act was for sale, her husband would charge 10% of the loan amount as his fees to every unsecured loan that they pressured the banks to advance to their freinds.
Not to mention that these loans were never paid back.
On the other hand Musharff is an honest,upstanding and secular president of Pakistan against whom there isnt any charge of misuse of power for personal gains.US should continue to support him in these difficult times

Fred

Bangladesh was the least likely candidate for independence.It has survived 36 years of independence despite efforts by India to suffocate it.

We have more in common with Iran than with Pakistan. We are part of the Mideast and as an independent part of the Mideast we will be prosperous.

Malleck

You must be unaware of the happenings in 1971 in what is today Bangladesh.

When the Bengalis decided that they could no longer tolerate the oppression by the Punjabi mafia, they rebelled. The Punjabi army then killed 3 million Bengalis.

In the 1970s when the Balochis wanted to throw off the yoke of Punjabi oppression and theft, they too began to fight back and between then and today over 300,000 thousand Balochi freedom fighters have been murdered by the Pakistani army. One favourite tactic by the Punjabi army was to take Balochis as prisoners, take them up in a helicopter and then drop them on the rocks below. Rocks are plentiful in Balochistan.

Islam could not hold together the west and east wings of Pakistan. The same is going to happen vis a vis the Balochis. We are not Pakistanis. We do not wish to be associated with a regime that has aided and abetted terrorism throughout the world including inside Pakistan.

The Author has shown the Pakistani Army in its true color. Good job. The Pkistani Army is neither democratic nor secular. The Generals pretend to be secular to stay in power and curry western favours. The western powers know the duplicity of the Pakistani army but still choose to do business with them.

This alliance is currently working partly because the alternative to the Army dictatorship could possibly be the Taliban rule in a country with nukes. The alliance is holding also because of the arrogance on the part of western powers believing they can manipulate these nut-case Generals to help destroy Alqaida and use Pakistan as a base for attack on Iran if necessary. The same kind of assumption was made when Saddam Hussein was once the darling of the west.

I think it is in the interest of West to consider all options including imagining a Pakistan without Musharaf. We should also consider options suggested by Sage in this forum. Because if we do not take action now, I am afraid we will be forced to work with very unpalatable options in the future.

FRED,

Maybe the bloke you refer to has learnt to be not so gentle a man after all!

But, instead of listening to the rude bloke, wait until events unfold in no more than 3 months' time. Mr. Rashid has made predictions. The rude bloke has made his. You seem to concur with Mr. Rashid. Let's see how it all works out in the end.

After all, nothing worthy of note is at stake aside the very minor consideration of the welfare of a mere 170 million 'non-secular-humanist' folks sharing nothing in common except, at best, 'tenuous bonds'.

It once again proves you cannot hold a country together with a religion. Its better Pakistan is broken up, just like some sane senators have a proposal to break up Iraq.

Well Mr Rashid, you certainly have stirred up a hornets' nest related to Pakistani politics right here in this forum! One gentleman shouts "Shut up!!"--twice!! while accusing his opponent of spewing venom. I can hear Doctor Ruth intoning, 'prrrojection!' Evidently any severe critique of Islam is "venom."

I don't know enough to decide whether Mr. Rashid's analysis of the Pakistani situation is correct. Pakistan is certainly a political and geographic entity, but the bonds holding its citizens together seem tenuous at best if the small sample of this forum is any sort of indicator. On the other hand Sage's vision of an independent, prosperous Baluchistan seems politically and economically unlikely, based on my limited reading of maps, resource charts, and history.

I SUSPECT that Mr Rashid is projecting his own secular-humanist democratic outlook onto a large number of people who don't share his outlook in any way--the great mass of the people of all parts of Pakistan. I'm a secular humanist myself, but I live in a country with enough like-minded folk to feel safe proclaiming it--for the moment.

Thanks for your work telling the story of Islamic fundamentalist fanaticism in Central Asia, Mr.
Rashid!

Sage,

Who appointed you to speak in the name of Balochis?

If you cannot tell the world, just shut up, SHUT UP!

Don't continue to spread your venom against Islam, hiding behind pseudonyms..

I also invite you to read the attached, if you care.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/IJ20Df03.html

The Balochis have always wanted to be independent. We never wanted to be part of Pakistan. The Pakistan government is supporting Islamist groups close to the Taliban in its attempt to suppress the freedom fighters of Balochistan. Pakistanis are using a divide and rule policy to suppress the Balochis. The Pakistani government supports Pashtun Islamist parties like the JUI-F, a key patron of the Afghan Taliban, in a bid to counter secular and moderate Baloch organizations. Balochs have been waging a nearly 60-year movement seeking independence and the control of Balochistan’s rich resources.

Al Qaeda and the Taliban and its Pakistani allies including the Musharraf government are using Balochistan as a base of operation and sanctuary and recruiting from JUI's (Jamaat Islami’s)extensive madarasa network. And with its own interests in mind, the US support for Musharraf is alienating the Balochis, who otherwise could be natural partners of the West in countering Islamic extremism in Pakistan and other parts of the Muslim world.

The Pakistani government should cease all military operations in Balochistan, release all political prisoners, including those in the unlawful custody of intelligence agencies, and accept the Supreme Court's directive to end the disappearances of political opponents. It should immediately produce those charged with criminal offences before competent civilian courts, which should be responsible for any trials, and drop terrorism charges against Balochistan National Party leader Akthar Mengal and release him from custody. Pakistan has no jurisdiction in Balochistan.

The staunchly anti-Taliban, anti-Al Qaeda and secular Baloch believe that the international community has yet to understand the threat the Pakistani military and it's Islamist allies pose, domestically and externally.

A rich and independent Balochistan will provide a good and accessible market for Pakistani goods. Pakistan needs economic progress to become stable. Holding on to Balochistan will delay Pakistan’s economic liberation ad infinitum.

It makes more sense for Pakistanis to re-examine the wisdom of continuing as a single nation. The Pakhtuns of NWFP have nothing in common with the Balochis, Sindhis and Punjabi all of whom have nothing in common with each other. Islam has failed to be a glue throughout the Muslim world because it does not address the needs of modern life. Balochistan and Sindh should be given their independence and NWFP shoul form a loose confederation with Afghanistan with who the Pakhtuns have more commonalities. When the limbs are dieseased it hurts the body more if they are kept intact with the body. It is time to chop them off.

I feel ashamed that you, a Pakistani,Mr. Rashid, are so full of ... well, if not hatred at least bitter resentment, against Musharraf in particular, but I sometimes think against your country generally.

I am not a Pakistani, I am not even a Muslim Indian -- my grandfather was Indian, a trader between Surat and East Africa so we happened fortuitously to settle in the mid-way Islalnd of Mauritius when he suddenly passed away in Mecca while performing Hadj. Unlike V. S. Naipaul, who long had a certain amount of disdain for India (and you partly remind me of him) but later revised his assessment, I have always been proud of my Indian and Muslim origin, and hold in my heart a special place for Pakistan.

I was reading, on AsiaTimes yesterday, former Indian Ambassador Bhadrakumar's piece on Benazir's return to Pakistan yesterday and his eloquent description of her reconnect with her people. I have written my own piece for possible publication in Mauritian newspapers.

I wish you could be as sanguine as Ambassador Bhadrakumar and I, we are. It is a virtue to believe in the reasonableness of your own people, Mr. Rashid! I'll take any bet that elections won't be postponed and that the Musharraf/Benazir alliance will hold. What happens after that will depend on (i) whether a critical mass of people can be mobilized that are as sanguine for Pakistan's future as Bhadrakumar and myself are; and (ii) the insanely mischievous foreign policy of the US in the region (including threats to Iran, attempts to demean Russia, support to Mujahideen Khalq, and over-ambitious attempts to control the energy resources of the Caspian region) is reined-in.

Pray for the return of peace and stability to your country, Mr. Rashid, instead of revelling in playing Cassandra.

Mr. Rashid -

Thank you for your cogent article.

Do you think that the current U.S. policy - supporting a Bhutto-Musharraf coalition - is the right one? I worry that we're seeking short-term stability (and not likely to find it) at the expense of siding with Musharraf against democratic elements in Pakistan.