Like former British prime minister Tony Blair and former Australian prime minister John Howard before him, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf is the latest buddy of US President George W. Bush to be blindsided by a backlash from voters.
But his participation in the current US conflicts and Bush-like uber-confidence and swagger were not really why Musharraf, a recently retired Army general, suffered a humiliating rebuke when his ruling party was trounced in Pakistan's parliamentary elections on Monday.
Instead of saving the tough tactics for Taliban and al-Qaeda militants in the country's lawless tribal areas, who have killed more than 1,000 people in the past 13 months, Musharraf chose to oppress his own law-abiding citizens, emasculate state institutions and trample upon Pakistan's nascent democracy during more than eight years as a military ruler.
It finally came back to haunt him as the opposition parties of former prime ministers Benazir Bhutto, who was assassinated on Dec. 27, and Nawaz Sharif finished one-two in national and provincial elections, according to unofficial results released on Tuesday.
While Musharraf himself was not standing for office, the polls were seen as a referendum on his rule, and his Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid, choked on the opposition's dust while finishing a distant third.
"His loss was a combination of his heavy-handedness in firing Iftikhar Chaudhry, the Supreme Court justice, in March of last year, and the state of emergency he imposed in November," said one Western political analyst in Islamabad.
attacks
"Then he attacked the media, attacked the lawyers, attacked the political parties," he said. "It's been a huge battle that democrats in this country have fought and seemed to have won. Yesterday was the culmination of a very long battle."
It was also the beginning of a political shift back to a civilian-dominated parliament and government, and the coming months will be uncertain. Pakistan faces myriad problems ranging from the growing Islamic militancy, to rising food and fuel prices, to the military's future in the emerging political paradigm.
But first, Musharraf's future must be determined. Some foreign and Pakistani analysts and Western diplomats predict he'll be gone in a matter of weeks, either impeached by a hostile incoming parliament or shown the exit by his former subordinate Army officers.
Not so, says presidential spokesman Rashid Qureshi, who said Musharraf was in good spirits and "happy the Pakistani people have participated in the cleanest, neatest, safest elections in the history of Pakistan."
"We hope to see a stable, progressive and forward-moving Pakistan after this," Qureshi said.
GREATER POWERS
Some wonder whether that's possible if Musharraf, who still controls Pakistan's nuclear arsenal, attempts to exercise greater powers than the incoming prime minister. But one policy likely to change is Pakistan's relationship with the Bush administration.
While the majority of Pakistanis feel Islamic militancy is a major problem at home, they also do not support the US war in the region. There has been widespread criticism that the Bush administration nurtured its relationship with Musharraf with billions of dollars for the Pakistani military to fight al-Qaeda and the Taliban while ignoring his assault on democratic forces.
The Muttahida Majlis-e-Ammal, an alliance of six Muslim parties that made huge gains in the 2002 elections on a sympathy wave for religious elements after the US invasion of Afghanistan, was trounced this time around. The coalition was viewed as a front for extremist groups.
The results showed that Pakistani voters are no longer tolerant of their homegrown Muslim extremists but also do no support military solutions dictated from Washington.
"What has to change, first of all, is these actions we've carried out in the last four, five, six years in our own areas, against our own people, which will have to stop," said Asad Durrani, a retired Army general and military analyst. "The management must now be non-military, non-political, through negotiations."
BUSH ADMINISTRATION
The Bush administration will likely cringe at this thought, but in reality it has little leverage considering Musharraf's weakened position.
The coming days will see a flurry of activity as Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party moves to form a government, possibly with Sharif's Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz, or a small regional party that could give it a simple majority in parliament.
"It's completely up to the political parties to decide that," Qureshi said. "The president doesn't come into that."
Musharraf had better get used to being on the sidelines.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS