Saturday, November 03, 2007

The Other Shoe Finally Drops

Bush's Pal Imposes Crackdown

It looks like what has been feared since the spring has actually happened. Echoing the trigger that led to Indira Gandhi's imposition of emergency in India more than thirty years ago, reports are emphasizing that President Gen. Pervez Musharraf's imposition of a state of "emergency plus" in Pakistan has come on the eve of the Pakistan Supreme Court's decision concerning his eligibility to be elected as President. But the Court has been active in other ways this week that have undoubtedly made Musharraf uncomfortable, most notably its strong signal that it regarded former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's rendition to Saudi Arabia to be unlawful and possibly in contempt of its earlier order permitting his return. "[W]e would like to emphasise that the judgment passed in Nawaz Sharif's case is still holding the field and required to be implemented in letter and spirit," noted Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, and the Court's decision in that case was expected this coming week as well.

So it's hardly surprising that an early focal point of Musharraf's crackdown -- indeed, perhaps the sole and exclusive point -- appears to be an effort to sideline the Pakistan Supreme Court:

"The Chief of the Army Staff (General Musharraf) has proclaimed state of emergency and issued provisional constitutional order," the brief announcement said at 6.10 pm Pakistan time without giving any details.

Under the order, the constitution remains suspended, the federal cabinet ceases to exist and judges will have to take oath afresh.

Dawn news reports that the Army has entered the Supreme Court in Islamabad and has detained Chief Justice Ifthekar Choudhry. [link]

The imposition of a "provisional constitutional order," to which judges must then newly swear allegiance to remain in office, is an old Pakistan Army magic trick, one that in the past has served as step one in a process that has helped conjure up the illusion, at least superficially, that some measure of constitutional normalcy remains even as the army in practice nullifies the constitution and imposes martial law. In the past, this process has led to the removal of judges who have refused to affirm their loyalty to the new provisional order and, ultimately, to legal validation of military rule itself. Musharraf himself issued a provisional constitutional order after his 1999 coup, and following the purge of five Supreme Court justices who refused to swear their allegiance to him, the Court greenlighted his coup.

However, it seems that on this occasion, the usual script might not be playing out as planned:

All members of the Supreme Court were required to sign a new provisional constitutional order mandating the state of emergency, but 8 of the 11 justices signed an order calling the state of emergency illegal and gathered at the Supreme Court building, said Gohar Khan. [link]

(UPDATE: the Court's order, which was issued by a bench of seven justices before the Army could put the judiciary on ice, is available here.) Earlier this week, one justice stated in open court that the Court would not be cowed by the threat of emergency. "'No threat will have any effect on this Bench, whether it is martial law or [state of] emergency,' said judge Javed Iqbal. 'Whatever will happen, it will be according to the Constitution and rules ... No group should think that it can take the Supreme Court hostage.'" [link] As rumors swirled this week that an emergency declaration might be imminent, newly-elected Supreme Court Bar Association President Aitzaz Ahsan -- who reportedly has been arrested -- made clear that the Pakistani legal community would resist any such move. If early reports are to be believed, it seems that the justices may indeed be exhibiting such courage in the face of Rangers storming the Supreme Court building.

No word as yet on whether they are welcoming these events in Washington as "not necessarily the worst thing that could happen." Whatever tepid and disingenuous objections the Bush Administration might now offer to what its pal Musharraf is doing, there seems little doubt that Pakistan has now been left to reap what the Bush Administration has helped to sow.

The Lahore, Islamabad , and Karachi Metblogs have more. (UPDATE: As does the ever-insightful Manan.)

Posted by Anil Kalhan


Unknown said...

Yes, the shoe drops. But is it the fancy jutti that goes with the sherwani, or the jackboot? :)

egarber said...

What a tangle.

The main question for me is:

Is the internal Taliban / Al Qaeda threat real? Or is it simply a pretext to assume power and derail the courts?

Well, if the answer is the former, we should listen to what Joe Biden said the other night in the debate --

Thirdly, this has incredible consequences for Afghanistan and Pakistan. Nobody talks about this. Do 75 of our colleagues not understand? We have now driven underground every moderate in Pakistan and in Afghanistan. This literally -- literally -- puts Karzai, as well as Musharraf, in jeopardy.

This would also mean that on some level, Pakistan is reaping it's own work -- having pumped a tremendous amount of funding into Taliban power circles a few years back. Now of course, Pakistan is battling pro-Taliban and Al Qaeda forces in Swat, etc.

If the answer is that it's just a power grab, that raises all the questions already posed about our closeness with such an anti-democratic regime.

Anil Kalhan said...

This would also mean that on some level, Pakistan is reaping it's own work -- having pumped a tremendous amount of funding into Taliban power circles a few years back.

To a considerable extent, of course, at the instigation of the United States and with U.S. funding. And this year, the Bush Administration's support for Musharraf has been unwavering -- even as he's edged closer to this moment with countless smaller, intermediate steps that the Administration has, at a minimum, implicitly condoned. It's a bit ridiculous for them to object now given that they should have been speaking up much earlier, when it actually might have made a difference. Instead, they stood silently by their man.

To answer your first question though, the longer the army remains in power, the stronger the militants will likely become. In the long run, restoration of civilian rule may offer the best hope of curbing and marginalizing the militants, as a number of informed observers have argued time and again. While Musharraf's scary talk about extremists is useful in that it frightens people in the West into supporting him and the Army, I don't think that's really the point of this decree. Both Musharraf's speech and the text of his decree itself make pretty transparently clear that the declaration is motivated by the desire for a pliable judiciary that will let Musharraf and the Army do as they please. (Which includes, don't forget, not investigating disappearances, which could be part of what started all of this back in March.)

As unfortunately ends up being the case all too often, I'm not sure I understand what Biden is talking about in the passage you've quoted.

egarber said...

As unfortunately ends up being the case all too often, I'm not sure I understand what Biden is talking about in the passage you've quoted.

I think that's my mistake -- 15 yards for clipping. Below is the full exchange. I think he was basically saying that the Iran resolution only makes things worse. Further, senators (who passed the anti-Iran resolution) and other leaders aren't watching Pakistan and Afghanistan.

MR. RUSSERT: MR. RUSSERT: We're going to get to Social Security in a little bit, but I want to stay on Iran, Senator Clinton.

As you know, you voted for the Kyl-Lieberman amendment, the only member on the stage here who did that. Senator, Jim Webb of Virginia said it is for all practical purposes mandating the military option, that it is a clearly worded sense of Congress that could be interpreted as a declaration of war.

Why did you vote for that amendment, which would -- calls upon the president to structure our military forces in Iraq with regard to the capability of Iran?

*Clinton answer clipped
* Dodd answer clipped

Senator Biden, do you agree with Senator Webb it was de facto a declaration of war?

SEN. BIDEN: I think it can be used as a fact -- a declaration.

But look, we have a -- we have a problem in the Senate -- and I'm not just directing this at Hillary; all -- there were 75 other people who voted with her, we're in a minority -- that there are consequences for what we do. And it's not even about going to war.

Let's look at what happened from the moment that vote took place.

Oil prices went up to $90 a barrel. Who benefits from that? All this talk of war, all this talk of declaring people to be terrorists, drove up the price of oil.

Secondly, we have emboldened Bush at a minimum. His talk of World War III, totally irresponsible talk. We've emboldened him, Tim, to be able to move if he chooses to move. They're terrorists. The fact that they're terrorists on one side of the border or the other, we've just declared them terrorists. That gives him the color of right to move against them.

Thirdly, this has incredible consequences for Afghanistan and Pakistan. Nobody talks about this. Do 75 of our colleagues not understand? We have now driven underground every moderate in Pakistan and in Afghanistan. This literally -- literally -- puts Karzai, as well as Musharraf, in jeopardy.

The notion here is it plays into this whole urban legend that America is on a crusade against Islam. This was bad -- if nothing else happens, not another single thing, this was bad policy.

The president had the ability to do everything that that amendment, that resolution called for without us talking to it. And all it has done is hurt us, even if not another single action is taken. Actions have consequences. Big nations can't bluff.

He also said this at another point, which hits more to what I was trying to get across in the first place:

MR. RUSSERT: Senator Biden, would you pledge to the American people that Iran would not build a nuclear bomb on your watch?

SEN. BIDEN: I would pledge to keep us safe. If you told me, Tim -- and this is not -- this is complicated stuff. We talk about this in isolation. The fact of the matter is the Iranians may get 2.6 kilograms of highly enriched uranium; the Pakistanis have hundreds, thousands of kilograms of highly enriched uranium.

If by attacking Iran to stop them from getting 2.6 kilograms of highly enriched uranium, the government in Pakistan falls, who has missiles already deployed, with nuclear weapons on them, that can already reach Israel, already reach India, then that's a bad bargain.

Presidents make wise decisions informed not by a vacuum in which they operate, by the situation they find themselves in the world. I will do all in my power to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons, but I will never take my eye off the ball.

What is the greatest threat to the United States of America: 2.6 kilograms of highly enriched uranium in Tehran or an out of control Pakistan? It's not close.

sorry for the long post...

egarber said...

I have another question. In reading the coverage today, I saw a blurb about how Musharraf's fate will play out "on the streets" -- i.e., the army is sensitive to public sentiment and might decide to remove him if the martial law declaration lacks widespread support.

So my question is:

Does the Pakistani military primarily and typically look to protect itself as an institution? Or is it more an organ of loyalty toward individual leaders?

Craig J. Albert said...

I'm not really in a position to begin parsing the Pakistani Constitution, so could some one who knows what they're talking about give a brief explanation of what the legal meaning and justifications are for holding the constitution "in abeyance"? From what I gather, the Pakistani constitution has been in some sort of limbo for at least 8 years, but I'm trying to understand whether this emergency is something constitutional, extraconstitutional, or something else.

And after I have I response, I will probably offer a cynical and snarky comment about the US Office of Legal Counsel, the Justice Department and the President's counsel.

egarber said...

but I'm trying to understand whether this emergency is something constitutional, extraconstitutional, or something else.

I'm certainly no expert, but I've read in several places that specifically because the constitution does NOT allow for the type of action taken, Pakistan is considered to be under martial law by legal experts, not anything softer like a viable "emergency order." I take that to mean that the action itself violates the constitution.

Anil Kalhan said...

It's an extraconstitutional move to hold the Constitution in abeyance but to permit it to function to some extent -- maybe crudely akin to saying that we'll ignore the Geneva Convention but roughly adhere to it. Without getting into the details, and at risk of oversimplifying quite a bit, the means by which this kind of extralegal move typically have been given legal effect in Pakistan has been by manipulating/intimidating the Supreme Court into validating the extraconstitutional step as justified by necessity. One significant means by which that has taken place in the past has been by requiring judges to take a new oath of allegiance to the new extraconstitutional regime itself -- precisely what Musharraf's "provisional constitutional order" requires.

In the past, judges have been all too willing to validate the coup under the doctrine of necessity, and voila! the coup gets legitimized. This is why Tayyab Mahmud calls all of this a "jurisprudence of successful treason," which I might have mentioned in one of my earlier posts. What's unprecedented in Pakistani history about the events of this week is that so many judges have refused to take the new oath, and that a bench of the Supreme Court actually invalidated the emergency proclamation and PCO altogether, rather than agreeing on Musharraf's terms to justify the coup under the doctrine of necessity. I suppose Musharraf and his cronies would be able to find enough judges willing to play ball soon enough -- after all, they've got the tanks *and* the Bush administration firmly on their side -- but already it seems that it won't be anywhere near as smooth sailing to get there as it has been in the past.

Now bring on the snark. ;)

Craig J. Albert said...

Good, that's I thought, and therefore here is my snarky comment.

I would like to see the OLC or White House counsel's memo on whether the President of this country could do the same thing here. Indeed, regardless of whether there is such a memo, I'd like to know if the question was even asked (I've got my guesses as to who'd be doing the asking) and thought about.

Desi Italiana said...


"Is the internal Taliban / Al Qaeda threat real? Or is it simply a pretext to assume power and derail the courts?"

The power of Islamists depends on Musharraf. He has been twirling the "Islamic Peril" myth for quite some time now, and has propped up Islamist parties in rigged "elections." This has been his strategy to convince his Western benefactors that without him, Pakistan would fall to the terrorists and Al Qaeda. In the end, how much power they have is contingent on how much power Musharraf has. I've written a blog post about it, but I encourage you to read the reports that I have embedded in my post:

Desi Italiana said...

Looks like the link got cut off. So the post's title is "Eating Out of Musharraf's Hand."

Anonymous said...



A片,色情,成人,做愛,情色文學,A片下載,色情遊戲,色情影片,色情聊天室,情色電影,免費視訊,免費視訊聊天,免費視訊聊天室,一葉情貼圖片區,情色,情色視訊,免費成人影片,視訊交友,視訊聊天,視訊聊天室,言情小說,愛情小說,AIO,AV片,A漫,av dvd,聊天室,自拍,情色論壇,視訊美女,AV成人網,色情A片,SEX





Anonymous said...



Anonymous said...

免費A片, ut聊天室, AV女優, 美女視訊, 免費成人影片, 成人論壇, 情色交友, 免費AV, 線上a片, 日本美女寫真集, 同志聊天室, 聊天室交友, 成人文章, 成人圖片區, 色情網站, 辣妹視訊, 美女交友, 微風成人區, 色美媚部落格, 色情影片, 成人影片, 成人網站, 免費A片, 上班族聊天室, A片,H漫, 18成人, a漫, av dvd, 一夜情聊天室, 微風成人, 成人圖片, 成人漫畫, 情色網, 日本A片, 免費A片下載, 性愛, 成人交友, 嘟嘟成人網, 嘟嘟成人網, 成人貼圖, 成人電影, 成人, 中部人聊天室, 080中部人聊天室, 成人貼圖, 成人小說, 成人文章, 成人圖片區, 免費成人影片, 成人遊戲, 微風成人, 愛情公寓, 成人電影, A片, 情色, 情色貼圖, 情色文學, 做愛, 成人遊戲, 成人影城, 色情聊天室, 色情小說, 一葉情貼圖片區, 情色小說, 色情, 寄情築園小遊戲, 色情遊戲, 成人網站, 麗的色遊戲, 色情網站, 成人論壇, 情色視訊, 情色電影, aio交友愛情館, 言情小說, 愛情小說, 色情A片, 情色論壇, 自拍, 癡漢, , 俱樂部, 豆豆聊天室, 聊天室, 色情影片, 視訊聊天室, 免費視訊聊天, 免費視訊, 視訊交友90739 情人視訊網影音視訊聊天室 免費視訊聊天室 視訊聊天 視訊交友 美女視訊 視訊美女 視訊 免費視訊 免費視訊聊天 視訊聊天室 辣妹視訊 一夜情 色情a片 aio交友愛情館 情色電影 情色視訊 色情遊戲 色情 情色小說 一葉情貼圖片區 色情小說 色情聊天室 情色交友 成人論壇 成人網站 色情網站 情色論壇 小高聊天室 女同志聊天室 6K聊天室 080苗栗人聊天室 080聊天室 聊天室尋夢園 UT男同志聊天室 男同志聊天室 尋夢園聊天室 UT聊天室 聊天室 豆豆聊天室 A片 成人電影 成人貼圖 嘟嘟成人網 美女交友 本土自拍 成人交友 成人影片

Anonymous said...

TheWorld of Kung fu Gold seems also important. His only since ancient immutable law. WoKf gold in the game is just like the money in the life. It is different of the buy World of Kung fu Gold online in the game world. You can have cheap World of Kung fu Gold to update your weapons. And the World of Kung fu money should be more and more.

Anonymous said...

酒店喝酒,禮服店,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,制服店,便服店,鋼琴酒吧,兼差,酒店兼差,酒店打工,伴唱小姐,暑假打工,酒店上班,日式酒店,舞廳,ktv酒店,酒店,酒店公關,酒店小姐,理容院,日領,龍亨,學生兼差,酒店兼差,酒店上班,酒店打工,禮服酒店,禮服店,酒店小姐,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,經紀 彩色爆米花,經紀人 彩色爆米花,酒店傳播,酒店經紀 彩色爆米花,爆米花,童裝,童裝拍賣,童裝大盤,童裝寄賣,童裝批貨,酒店,酒店,童裝切貨,酒店,GAP童裝,酒店,酒店 ,禮服店 , 酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,招待所,

Anonymous said... . .
[url=]puma shoes[/url]
[url=]chaussures puma[/url]
[url=]nike air max ltd[/url]

Anonymous said...

酒店經紀人, 菲梵酒店經紀, 酒店經紀, 禮服酒店上班, 酒店小姐兼職, 便服酒店經紀, 酒店打工經紀, 制服酒店工作, 專業酒店經紀, 合法酒店經紀, 酒店暑假打工, 酒店寒假打工, 酒店經紀人, 菲梵酒店經紀, 酒店經紀, 禮服酒店上班, 酒店經紀人, 菲梵酒店經紀, 酒店經紀, 禮服酒店上班, 酒店小姐兼職, 便服酒店工作, 酒店打工經紀, 制服酒店經紀, 專業酒店經紀, 合法酒店經紀, 酒店暑假打工, 酒店寒假打工, 酒店經紀人, 菲梵酒店經紀, 酒店經紀, 禮服酒店上班, 酒店小姐兼職, 便服酒店工作, 酒店打工經紀, 制服酒店經紀,,

Unknown said...

Those are best online website , best service , best quality. Good luck !
ed hardy clothing
Chaussures Sport
Tennis Racquet Shop
Cheap Polo Shirts
The North Face Jackets
cheap ed hardy
Chaussures Sport
Tennis Racquet
nike shox r4
ed hardy
cheap ed hardy
polo shirts
cheap polo
Remise Chaussures Sport
nike tn requin
ed hardy clothes
nike femmes chaussures