Pakistan To Declare State Of Emergency?

by

11

Pakistan’s President Musharraf is very close to declaring a State of Emergency in Pakistan, due to “External, and internal threats” to Pakistan and deteriorating law and order in the Taliban controlled northwest near the Afghan border, a spokesman said Thursday.

By external, does he mean Barack Obama? Oh, I guess he does:

Tariq Azim, the deputy information minister also said statements coming from the United States, including from Sen. Barak Obama, D-Ill., a presidential hopeful, over the possibility of U.S. military action against al-Qaida in Pakistan “has started alarm bells ringing and has upset (the) Pakistani public.”

Musharraf told American Senator Richard Durbin in a meeting yesterday in Karachi that comments by senior U.S. officials and would-be presidential candidates about the possibility of unilateral U.S. strikes within the country were “counterproductive and that Pakistan remained resolved to fight terrorism,” the foreign ministry said in a statement.

More about Obama’s reckless sabor rattling can be found at Muslihoon’s.

Government forces, feeling the pressure from the United States to crack down on the growing terrorist problem in their tribal areas, attacked two militant bases with helicopter gunships and artillery yesterday in some of the army’s toughest action in the lawless Afghan border region since militant attacks began surging last month.

“He (Musharraf) emphasized that only Pakistan’s security forces, which were fully capable of dealing with any situation, would take counterterrorism action inside Pakistani territory,” the ministry said.

Hat tips: Right Truth and Conservative Beach Girl

UPDATE (Thursday morning):

It looks like Condoleeza Rice helped to persuade Musharraf from declaring a State of Emergency.

11 thoughts on “Pakistan To Declare State Of Emergency?”

  1. I *heart* your blog.

    Were it not for Rice and Bush, Musharraf would have been sorely tempted to declare a state of emergency. Although doing so might be advantageous in that he could attack militants with impunity, it would further erode what little support Musharraf has among the people. He needs to be reelected this October in order for the military government’s efforts against militants to remain successful.

    In any case, I would not want to be in Musharraf’s shoes (boots?) right now.

    Like

  2. Sometimes it takes a strong man to teach a stupid child the lessons of life.

    I don’t understand this demand for EUROPEAN parliamentary democracy that the democrats love to espouse, I mean hell, Italy has had more than 100 different governments since 1947. THATS democracy? thats Government?

    Really, Democrats are stupid.

    Like

  6. Musharaff has a significant majority in the cities, but Pakistan is not yet a metropolitan or cosmopolitan society.

    Musharaff knows that. but he’s getting old, he needs to find a trustworthy replacement, and that is risky business right there.

    Like

  8. ND,

    Sometimes stability isn’t pretty.

    John Locke wrote the second treatise on government under a dictatorial regime what allowed SOME freedom.

    It isn’t exaclty baby steps, but imagine giving your 6 children equal representation in your household?

    It takes the two strongmen/people made up of you and your husband to teach them.

    Like

  10. Washington had his regulars quell at least 2 mutiny’s whatever it’s called in the army.

    Also, Jefferson was present during a purge in philly, as the loyalists were hung from lampposts.

    Freedom, and revolution, and independance are not pretty things when faced with an existing ideaology. In fact, the UN and the US and the EU HINDER 3rd world nations from finding freedom with their IDIOTIC!!!! rules of war.

    Example Francis Marion violated the rules of the war at the time, Francis Marion is the inspiration for the movie “patriot” and if he wasn’t, then the authors weren’t very original.

    During the Revolutionary War, Francis Marrion broke the rules of gentilemanly warfare. Do you regret that?

    I know I don’t.

    War is ALWAYS no holds, the term “all’s fair in love and war”. . . .

    You know that?

    How bold were either you or he, before you found love ND? One of you crossed a line, and one or both of you liked it, and you found love and marriage.

    “The Laws of War” is the most IDIOTIC concept ever created.

    Like

  11. Musharraf will be elected. Whether it is free and fair is another matter all together. (Although, to be honest, in this case it really shouldn’t matter. We need Musharraf in power, and firmly in power, by whatever means.)

    I do not think Bhutto will be prime minister. Unless, of course, the legal and juridical apparatus of Pakistan decide to take on Musharraf and use their legal mumbo-jumbo to override her exile. Another similar threat is Nawaz Sharif.

    I think maybe Musharraf made a mistake by exiling Sharif rather than executing him (which people expected him to do).

    So far, since Musharraf has come into power, the prime minister has been his puppet. This is necessary for the smooth functioning of government, otherwise nothing would get done. Or, in order to get things done, Musharraf would have to throw out all pretenses of democracy and institute a blatant military autocracy. (The appearances of democracy work well for him and for us, hence the calls made by Rice and Bush to prevent a possible overthrow of the civilian government.)

    But: if Bhutto and/or Sharif can function as Musharraf’s puppet and not rape the country like they did the last times, perhaps having them in power would not be so bad. (Recall that Bhutto was prime minister twice and overthrown both times, and similarly Sharif was prime minister twice and overthrown both times.)

    Like

Leave a comment