I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Brown used this politically to try to save his 40-day detention plans and push it through. Expect to hear speeches about “The continuing threat to freedom from those who would destroy our way of life”, and therefore, why Brown needs to change our way of life…
1. Chaos
2. The smack of firm government followed by destabilizing creep to liberality.
There are no good options in the short term.
Can anyone satisfactorily explain why Pakistan is so important in geopolitical terms. Is it only because it is the primary source of potential terrorists.
6 As said Musharraf is no longer the most important man in that Country. That is now the President of the National Golf Association. Everything hinges on him
A disaster as I believe elections were due to be held next month.
The world will watch and wait for comments and decisive action from George Bush.
I wouldn’t be surprised if he ordered the navy,air force and army to keep an eye on matters.
Grim day for democracy as we understand it in the West.
by
Herbert Proper Senior
December 27th, 2007 at 2:03 pm
5 It borders Iran. It borders India. It borders China It has the Kashmir problem. That’s just for starters
Terrible news. The US and UK will have to decide one way or the other whether it is going to have an ethical foreign policy, and that means supporting states who behave properly, or whether we’re going to behave unethically by supporting regimes because they are nasty to our enemies. Past meddling in Pakistan is partly the cause of today’s troubles.
Thanks for everybody’s instant input. Basically it’s about Osama Bin L then. If he wasn’t nearby, this would probably not cause the concern expressed above by many.
But the islamist hardliners are (again “allegedly”) not as strong as you would think - 20% or so.
I suspect a stance of “a plague on all your houses” to all the various factions in Pakistan is not that sound if they actually do have WOMD?
This is a disaster. Pakistan is already collapsing with the ‘power sharing’ deal in NW Frontier province. With this attack, things just get worse. I do hope that the US has tampered with the Pakistan nuclear weapons sufficiently to make them unusable when (and I believe it is when, not if) they fall into the hands of Islamists.
Bhutto, for all her manifold faults and the corruption associated with her husband’s family, was the strongest voice for the more secular and anti-Islamist policies. It is a disaster for Pakistan and for the faint hopes for any democratic stability.
23 - 77% Sunni, 20% Shia, 3% non-Muslim (Christian, Hindu, Sikh) according to WIkipedia. Sunni-dominated, and I think would react badly to Iranian interference.
The real problem from a British perspective is what happens to our troops in Afghanistan if Pakistan goes into meltdown. If there is even a whiff that the country could go into civil war we would have to evacuate are soldiers right away.
I was going to post something about UK politics but that suddenly seems irrelevant in the face of this tragedy.
Early thoughts ? Will the oil price spike (and stock markets fall) on the back of this - will we see oil push back toward $100 a barrel (currently just below $92) ?
Could elements supporting Musharraf be responsible ? Is it simply al-qaeda or a related jihadist faction ? I don’t know though how an election can take place under these circumstances I’m uncertain.
I can only imagine what the internal Pakistani reaction will be in places like Lahore and Islamabad - rioting and disorder at the very least. There is no successor in the PPP that I’m aware but someone will have to fill an enormous gap.
23 (&others). I was going to say Pakistan is about 25% Shia, but either way it’s in the 20-25% band. No chance of Iranian involvement (90%+ Shia in Iran).
Sad day for Pakistan; I was no great fan of Bhutto but she was one of the better of a bad bunch.
In Iraq Iran has been driven to control the shi’ite parts, but not sought power so directly in the other areas. BNot sure if that prioncile is applicable in Pakistan in the evnt of a complete breakdown
The Army will be the main secular force. They will not want the nutters in control of the toys. It drives you back to the “strong man” option.
25. I’d agree with that, and I don’t think Iran will want to try anything as dangerous as attmepting to influence events there. While Pakistan is certainly a muslim country, it also seems to be one with a strong sense of its independence, both from India and also from the middle-East.
I’d have thought the most likely immediate outcomes would be a postponing or cancellation of the election and a further period of emergency rule. I would think that the the military will be monitoring things very closely and that Musharraf will be in close contact. Now that he’s taken off his uniform, there is a nice synthesis of interest in the two backing each other.
1. Musharraf seems to be the single greatest beneficiary, and the west will probably (mistakenly) decide to hold its nose and prop him up. But it wouldn’t surprise me if his corpse were being buried before 2008 was out.
2. Forget democracy in Pakistan for another 10 years, minimum.
3. The coalition will soon need to take a hard decision whether to pour more troops into Afghanistan or give up on it.
We seem to only be interested in Pakistan fearing the “Islamists”. I assume this is Jamaat-i-Islaami predominantly, ie hardline Taliban style Islamists. They actually have very little support. Certainly not enough to control the country. However, we forget that in the late 70s and 80s we supported Zia Ul-Haq, who took the country from Benazir’s father for the sake of Islam. He governed in a supposedly Islamic fashion. Geopolitically, the US and the UK loved him. He hated the Shia (which Benazir is), and thus Iran, and supported the Muhajedeen fighting the Soviets in Afganistan. Musharaff will want to make himself seem as attractive to the west as Zia Ul-Haq did. That will meen he will continue attacking “extremists” but will start seeming more Islamic to court the support the Sharif brothers have, which is lower and lower middle class Sunni muslim nationalist. The PPP, Bhutto’s party, will be interesting. Without the former PM in the way it could turn into a genuine centre-left people party without its currupt leader and leadership. It is how it acts which will define the internal rumblings of Pakistani politics in the next three months.
Lets start at the beginning. This was always on the cards and the finger is already pointing direct at Musharraf’s people.
Regionally the problem doesn’t really involve Iran to a great degree, the Indians will sit tight. The main issue is internal.
The great irony is that a return to democracy is probably the biggest bulwark against Islamic extremists but the West is between a rock and a hard place and this assasination may well not change the Western view despite the outrage that will no doubt pour forth. Until such times as they can find a suitable alternative to Musharraf it has to be him as the only force that can bring some control.
The calculation about when to move support away is based a) finding that alternative figure and or b) the moment they conclude Musharraf is so playing along with some extremist elements that he’s actually a bigger problem.
re 31 of course St Tony assured us that we would see the affair through in Afghanistan and then hobbled our involvement with his little adventure in Iraq.
16 “Pakistan also has “people power” - there are millions of Pakistani descent scattered around the world. Most notably, of course, in Britain.”
I wonder if British politics in some cities will become like politics in New York, only substituting “Pakistani” for “Jewish” accordingly. I cannot think of any other “national” groups having any influence in mainland UK politics; even Irish politics never really transferred.
35: Yes, if the Taliban had been crushed in Afghanistan, and Karzai was ruling something resembling a democracy there; and if Iraq hadnt been invaded, there would have been much less support in Pakistan for Islamists and the drive for power they have made in the last few years. Going for Iraq has thrown Afghanistan and Pakistan to the wolves…
20 - I believe there was a report recently that the US armed forces had drawn up a (completely speculative of course) plan to use special forces to seize the Pakistani nuclear weapons in the event that the Islamists took over.
by
Timothy (likes zebras)
December 27th, 2007 at 3:35 pm
38 - I read that as well. Do you have a link to the story?
It’s also worth remembering that Saddam ruled Iraq with essentially only minority (30-40%) Sunni support, so it’s not outlandish to suggest that Islamists with 20% support could be close to taking control of Pakistan if they are sufficiently organised and successful at terrorising the rest of the population.
by
Timothy (likes zebras)
December 27th, 2007 at 3:39 pm
45. In fact, there’s a very strong probability that you could go the other way and say that there’s a guarentee that an Islamist government wouldn’t get the army / security apparatus. The Pakistani army has a long enough tradition of interference to uphold its own established opinion of what Pakistan should be to be able to predict how it would react to a probable or actual election win by an avowedly Islamist party.
43 I know what you mean, Chris A, but I wonder if it might become more complicated than that. A predominantly Asian constituency returning an Asian MP seems (to me) to be entirely reasonable - but will the voters have to become embroiled in arcane discussions as to whether Candidate A supports Bhuttoists whereas Candidate B supports Imran Khanists, or whatever?
I suppose that until fairly recently, Irish politics was governed by which sides the candidates’ grandfathers fought on in the Irish Civil War, so I suppose it could happen here as well.
45. Discussing majorities/minorities within Pakistan as a whole is only a small part of the picture - majorities within different areas can take power regionally, without doing so nationally. The survival of the state of Pakistan as a functioning entity cannot be assumed.
Perhaps the most important televised statement George Bush has had to make for some time.
I am sure the world will watch carefully.
President Bush, vacationing at his Texas ranch, has been “informed about the situation in Pakistan,” said the White House, which offered no other immediate comment. “We condemn the acts of violence which took place today in Pakistan,” said a spokesman. The president was expected to make a televised statement on the assassination at 11 a.m. ET.
by
Herbert Proper Senior
December 27th, 2007 at 4:02 pm
Al Jazeera. Some discussions within the presidential house that the elections could be postponed.
50: This is a bigger than Pakistan. Why have India and China succeeded, and Africa and Pakistan (say) usually not. A lot of it (not all though) seems to ride on having a deeply embedded culture with an agreed legal system, even if its not very liberal or western. Shintoism has been as good for Japan in this respect as Judao-Christian beliefs have been for us. See also India and China
Pakistan was created by ethnic cleansing in 1947 as much as anything else. Although Hindus moved in to India from Pakistan, as a proportion it was a smaler part.
Its nothing to do with Islam per se. Other countries that are Islamic have prospered, even if you don’t like how they divide their economy up.
re 48 well not being a local party member I don’t know for sure but I’m sure some of the shenanigans in Birmingham and the creation of various sub-Muslim parties have had a touch of that about it. I would disagree entirely with you view that a predominantly Asian constituency should have an Asian MP - and it doesn’t seem like a very liberal view. After all in almost every constituency the majority electorate is elderly and female - certianly so for the voters, but that doesn’t make it reasonable that all MPs should be elderly women.
58. Disagree. I think a large part of Pakistan’s problem is Islam. Though its not the only cause, naturally.
There are few examples of Islamic countries thriving - unless they have enormous reserves of oil. Even then, they can screw it up - Iraq and Iran are classic examples.
Malaysia is one of the very rare examples of an Islamic country that has done well despite having no oil - and it has special circumstances (large energetic Chinese and Indian minority, inheritance of good colonial government, booming Asian neighbours, etc)
Islam is a noble religion, but it generally militates against free expression, intellectual enquiry, true individualism and technological and scientific enterprise. All the Arab countries put together publish fewer books per year than… Spain.
Islam also suppresses women, and if half your population is kept indoors and/or illiterate its hard to compete with countries that better utilise the potential of all citizens.
Islam needs a reformation, there are hopeful signs it may happen. It will probably come from the westernised Muslim diaspora. Until it happens, strongly Islamic countries not blessed by oil wealth will probably struggle.
51. Pakistan has large ungovernable areas of territory in its Northwest Frontier. Even the might of the British Empire couldn’t sedate this area, despites decades of efforts.
58. India and China have thousands of years of advanced civilisation. Sub-Saharan Africa was still a tribal society until colonialism. Since when did Judeo-Christian beliefs cause democracy? Have Ethiopia or Armenia been bastions of freedom? And absolutist France until the secularists took over? Equally democracy had nothing to do with Shintoism in Japan: democracy was imposed by the Americans after military catastrophe.
40 Equally, Assad dynasty in Syria have ruled from the Shia side, against a majority Sunni population even greater - ?70 - 30 or 80 - 20 IIRC. My feeling however, is that Iran would not be immediately interested in “intervening” in Pakistan, unless the instability directly threatened their interest as they saw it.
59 Thanks, Chris A. When you said “I would disagree entirely with you view that a predominantly Asian constituency should have an Asian MP - and it doesn’t seem like a very liberal view”, I think you might have misunderstood the point I was trying to make. I am not saying that a predominantly Asian cnstituency SHOULD have an Asian MP - just that it seems reasonable if it happens. In the same way, Scottish seats have predominently Scottish (not English or Welsh) MPs.
Very sad to hear the news this afternoon, RIP indeed.
A real woman of courage - refusing to hide away or stay silent despite facing such danger on a regular basis. My first reaction should have been of shock, but it was just a resigned sadness. My perceptions of Pakistan are such that I have come to expect violence to be part of their political process. We aimed to liberate the Middle East but have become so accustomed to violence as a way of culture we have stopped being outraged, as we should be. I hear of many people killed in a suicide bombing and jst shrug - I know this is appalling but I have heard the news so many times.
I wish we could be resensitised to what is going on. If we could, I think we would start to deal with the causes of this culture of violence and extremism. Agree that elections will need to be postponed, for a period of mourning I’d expect, and depending on the rioting, the state of emergency could come back. No short term fixes, and a grim outlook. A sad day for Pakistan, a sad day for democracy.
“Islam is a noble religion, but it generally militates against free expression, intellectual enquiry, true individualism and technological and scientific enterprise.”
“Islam also suppresses women, and if half your population is kept indoors and/or illiterate its hard to compete with countries that better utilise the potential of all citizens.”
Exactly the same could have been said about Catholicism a hundred years ago.
But we aren’t talking about the past, we’re talking about the present. And the very fact you’re comparing modern Islam with Catholicism 100 years ago speaks for itself.
69. Agreed, indeed I considered making that point in my comment. Almost everything that can be said, negatively, of Islamist countries could have been said about, say, Catholic Ireland in the 19th century (or even the early 20th). Or indeed of Mormon Utah in the 1950s!
66. Trying to find the direct citation for my example,but here’s something similar I just located (in some blog):
‘Intellectual isolation is a widespread Arab phenomenon, not just an Iraqi one. Some of the statistics are startling. According to the United Nations’ 2003 “Arab Human Development Report,” five times more books are translated annually into Greek, a language spoken by just 11 million people, than into Arabic. “No more than 10,000 books were translated into Arabic over the entire past millennium,” says the U.N., “equivalent to the number translated into Spanish each year.”‘
re 67 thanks for clarifying that. There’s much to be said that in a ward like mine (which incidentally is about equally split into white/Asian/black) where the white population can’t get off it’s collective arse to be involved in the political process, then it is entirely reasonable.
Sean
Islam in early medieval times often led the search for intellectual advance. My own knowledge of Islam is not particularly strong, but I would tend to agree that there is a need (as there was earlier in Christianity’s history) to adapt and change to new world circumstances. Whether you believe in any religion or not, there is no doubt that they become less relevant if they resist change, and if they cling to outdated “customs” and systems of behaviour.
72. Or indeed Protestantism in Prussia. As tempting (and it is tempting) as it is to view religious differences as the cause for different political paths, I just don’t think the evidence backs it up. I actually think that the reverse is true: the regime in power, whether democratic or absolutist, adapts the original religion to justify its system of governance. I would say the cultural origin of democracy actually lies with the emergence of a numerous merchant class. If that class successfully makes a claim for power, democracy and middle class values pervade society and its religion. If not, aristocratic values and religion continue.
76. We disagree. I have travelled widely in Islamic countries and… well…. it is hard not to believe the tenets of Islam have something to do with the “backwardness” of Islamic countries. It’s like saying communism had nothing to do with the dire state of Russia in 1978, it was the climate or the geography that led to Soviet decay.
Hm.
Anyway I think my point is made in the article I linked to - in comment 75.
That’s not to say Islam is “bad”. It is very arguable that Islam makes people happier than bourgeois western materialism. Though this is impossible to prove, I subjectively think it might well be true.
But in terms of pure economic development and intellectual advance, as we understand it, Islam is fairly bad news.
78. Yes, I was a bit glib there - Malaysia does have oil. What I meant, and should have said, was overwhelming supplies of oil wealth per capita, like the Emirates.
79. I think we do actually agree. My point is that, had democracy taken hold there, Islam would now be interpreted very differently, selectively focusing on the nice bits and ignoring the rest (like Christianity now does).
But when an aristocratic class maintains power, there is no such liberalising effect and the religion stays the same. The ruling class encourages unbending traditionalism in all matters as this justifies its rule. The unflexible, backwards-remaining religion then holds back development further - which the present form of Islam undeniably does.
However, I think the effect would be the same regardless of what religion you started out with.
82. Ah, I see what you mean. Your point was subtler than I understood - my apologies, I have a cold!
But I still slightly disagree with you. I think that, because of the structure, history and provenance of Islam, it has militant fundamentalism in its DNA. There is no Islamic “church” to reform, so it will always be susceptible to literalist interpretations, which seek to outdo each other in their zeal - Deobandi, Wahhabism, etc etc.
Put it another way, the terroir of Islam does not favour the cultured vines of liberalism.
Something bad, I guess… Has anything good ever come out of the place?
Probably another state of emergency and then we’ll see if Kayani can save his Country
RIP
This is potentially very sinister. Worst Case Scenario: outright civil war, in a pseudo-Islamist state armed with nukes.
Best case: Musharraf reinforces the State of Emergency, and clamps down for a few years, leading to further resentment. And that’s the best case.
V sobering.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Brown used this politically to try to save his 40-day detention plans and push it through. Expect to hear speeches about “The continuing threat to freedom from those who would destroy our way of life”, and therefore, why Brown needs to change our way of life…
Bad options for us
1. Chaos
2. The smack of firm government followed by destabilizing creep to liberality.
There are no good options in the short term.
Can anyone satisfactorily explain why Pakistan is so important in geopolitical terms. Is it only because it is the primary source of potential terrorists.
3. And if Musharraf gets “his” next? The mob are already baying for his blood at the hospital…
Very sad and very very bad.
I presume there will be some rioting.
Who knows what will happen to the elections now.
6 As said Musharraf is no longer the most important man in that Country. That is now the President of the National Golf Association. Everything hinges on him
A disaster as I believe elections were due to be held next month.
The world will watch and wait for comments and decisive action from George Bush.
I wouldn’t be surprised if he ordered the navy,air force and army to keep an eye on matters.
Grim day for democracy as we understand it in the West.
5 It borders Iran. It borders India. It borders China It has the Kashmir problem. That’s just for starters
Terrible news. The US and UK will have to decide one way or the other whether it is going to have an ethical foreign policy, and that means supporting states who behave properly, or whether we’re going to behave unethically by supporting regimes because they are nasty to our enemies. Past meddling in Pakistan is partly the cause of today’s troubles.
Re 5 The scary thing is that Pakistan is a nuclear power. If these weapons fall into the wrong hands heaven help us all.
Some places just do things differently: “Absolutism, moderated by assassination” is the only workable form of government for some folks…
10 - but no economic spin. No oil, no economic power.
10,
And it borders Afghanistan, it’s nuclear armed and has a fairly warlike history in just 60 years of existence.
14. Pakistan also has “people power” - there are millions of Pakistani descent scattered around the world. Most notably, of course, in Britain.
What happens in Pakistan affects Britain, particularly, through the million or more Brits of Pakistani origin.
If Bhutto is dead and Musharraf is increasingly powerless (allegedly) then does Iran move into the vacuum. Might we actually welcome that?
Iran wil go nuclear at some time. We are going to have to get used to managing that
Thanks for everybody’s instant input. Basically it’s about Osama Bin L then. If he wasn’t nearby, this would probably not cause the concern expressed above by many.
But the islamist hardliners are (again “allegedly”) not as strong as you would think - 20% or so.
I suspect a stance of “a plague on all your houses” to all the various factions in Pakistan is not that sound if they actually do have WOMD?
17. Isn’t Pakistan Shia. I thought Pakistan was Sunni.
This is a disaster. Pakistan is already collapsing with the ‘power sharing’ deal in NW Frontier province. With this attack, things just get worse. I do hope that the US has tampered with the Pakistan nuclear weapons sufficiently to make them unusable when (and I believe it is when, not if) they fall into the hands of Islamists.
Re 19, Chrishio “Isn’t Pakistan Shia. I thought Pakistan was Sunni.”
its both, predominantly Sunni though.
19. Sorry that should have been Iran is Shia, Pakistan is Sunni. They exist in two different zones of influence.
Is Pakistan 100% Sunni, or is it splt?
Bhutto, for all her manifold faults and the corruption associated with her husband’s family, was the strongest voice for the more secular and anti-Islamist policies. It is a disaster for Pakistan and for the faint hopes for any democratic stability.
23 - 77% Sunni, 20% Shia, 3% non-Muslim (Christian, Hindu, Sikh) according to WIkipedia. Sunni-dominated, and I think would react badly to Iranian interference.
The real problem from a British perspective is what happens to our troops in Afghanistan if Pakistan goes into meltdown. If there is even a whiff that the country could go into civil war we would have to evacuate are soldiers right away.
Afternoon all
I was going to post something about UK politics but that suddenly seems irrelevant in the face of this tragedy.
Early thoughts ? Will the oil price spike (and stock markets fall) on the back of this - will we see oil push back toward $100 a barrel (currently just below $92) ?
Could elements supporting Musharraf be responsible ? Is it simply al-qaeda or a related jihadist faction ? I don’t know though how an election can take place under these circumstances I’m uncertain.
I can only imagine what the internal Pakistani reaction will be in places like Lahore and Islamabad - rioting and disorder at the very least. There is no successor in the PPP that I’m aware but someone will have to fill an enormous gap.
23 (&others). I was going to say Pakistan is about 25% Shia, but either way it’s in the 20-25% band. No chance of Iranian involvement (90%+ Shia in Iran).
Sad day for Pakistan; I was no great fan of Bhutto but she was one of the better of a bad bunch.
In Iraq Iran has been driven to control the shi’ite parts, but not sought power so directly in the other areas. BNot sure if that prioncile is applicable in Pakistan in the evnt of a complete breakdown
The Army will be the main secular force. They will not want the nutters in control of the toys. It drives you back to the “strong man” option.
25. I’d agree with that, and I don’t think Iran will want to try anything as dangerous as attmepting to influence events there. While Pakistan is certainly a muslim country, it also seems to be one with a strong sense of its independence, both from India and also from the middle-East.
I’d have thought the most likely immediate outcomes would be a postponing or cancellation of the election and a further period of emergency rule. I would think that the the military will be monitoring things very closely and that Musharraf will be in close contact. Now that he’s taken off his uniform, there is a nice synthesis of interest in the two backing each other.
1. Musharraf seems to be the single greatest beneficiary, and the west will probably (mistakenly) decide to hold its nose and prop him up. But it wouldn’t surprise me if his corpse were being buried before 2008 was out.
2. Forget democracy in Pakistan for another 10 years, minimum.
3. The coalition will soon need to take a hard decision whether to pour more troops into Afghanistan or give up on it.
We seem to only be interested in Pakistan fearing the “Islamists”. I assume this is Jamaat-i-Islaami predominantly, ie hardline Taliban style Islamists. They actually have very little support. Certainly not enough to control the country. However, we forget that in the late 70s and 80s we supported Zia Ul-Haq, who took the country from Benazir’s father for the sake of Islam. He governed in a supposedly Islamic fashion. Geopolitically, the US and the UK loved him. He hated the Shia (which Benazir is), and thus Iran, and supported the Muhajedeen fighting the Soviets in Afganistan. Musharaff will want to make himself seem as attractive to the west as Zia Ul-Haq did. That will meen he will continue attacking “extremists” but will start seeming more Islamic to court the support the Sharif brothers have, which is lower and lower middle class Sunni muslim nationalist. The PPP, Bhutto’s party, will be interesting. Without the former PM in the way it could turn into a genuine centre-left people party without its currupt leader and leadership. It is how it acts which will define the internal rumblings of Pakistani politics in the next three months.
25. IIRC, some parts of Pakistan bordering Iran are Shi’a dominated.
Lets start at the beginning. This was always on the cards and the finger is already pointing direct at Musharraf’s people.
Regionally the problem doesn’t really involve Iran to a great degree, the Indians will sit tight. The main issue is internal.
The great irony is that a return to democracy is probably the biggest bulwark against Islamic extremists but the West is between a rock and a hard place and this assasination may well not change the Western view despite the outrage that will no doubt pour forth. Until such times as they can find a suitable alternative to Musharraf it has to be him as the only force that can bring some control.
The calculation about when to move support away is based a) finding that alternative figure and or b) the moment they conclude Musharraf is so playing along with some extremist elements that he’s actually a bigger problem.
That assumes Musharraf stays in place himself.
re 31 of course St Tony assured us that we would see the affair through in Afghanistan and then hobbled our involvement with his little adventure in Iraq.
16 “Pakistan also has “people power” - there are millions of Pakistani descent scattered around the world. Most notably, of course, in Britain.”
I wonder if British politics in some cities will become like politics in New York, only substituting “Pakistani” for “Jewish” accordingly. I cannot think of any other “national” groups having any influence in mainland UK politics; even Irish politics never really transferred.
35: Yes, if the Taliban had been crushed in Afghanistan, and Karzai was ruling something resembling a democracy there; and if Iraq hadnt been invaded, there would have been much less support in Pakistan for Islamists and the drive for power they have made in the last few years. Going for Iraq has thrown Afghanistan and Pakistan to the wolves…
20 - I believe there was a report recently that the US armed forces had drawn up a (completely speculative of course) plan to use special forces to seize the Pakistani nuclear weapons in the event that the Islamists took over.
38 - I read that as well. Do you have a link to the story?
It’s also worth remembering that Saddam ruled Iraq with essentially only minority (30-40%) Sunni support, so it’s not outlandish to suggest that Islamists with 20% support could be close to taking control of Pakistan if they are sufficiently organised and successful at terrorising the rest of the population.
39 - Found it on the Guardian website here
Pakistan erupting in all major cities: Sky
re 36 Augustus it already is in some parts of Birmingham. I can never see another Jeff Rooker being MP for Birmingham Perry Barr for instance.
41. See also the NYT article here.
40. He had the army and security apparatus.. There’s no guarantee the Islamiscists would.
Thanks Timothy
45. In fact, there’s a very strong probability that you could go the other way and say that there’s a guarentee that an Islamist government wouldn’t get the army / security apparatus. The Pakistani army has a long enough tradition of interference to uphold its own established opinion of what Pakistan should be to be able to predict how it would react to a probable or actual election win by an avowedly Islamist party.
43 I know what you mean, Chris A, but I wonder if it might become more complicated than that. A predominantly Asian constituency returning an Asian MP seems (to me) to be entirely reasonable - but will the voters have to become embroiled in arcane discussions as to whether Candidate A supports Bhuttoists whereas Candidate B supports Imran Khanists, or whatever?
I suppose that until fairly recently, Irish politics was governed by which sides the candidates’ grandfathers fought on in the Irish Civil War, so I suppose it could happen here as well.
45. Discussing majorities/minorities within Pakistan as a whole is only a small part of the picture - majorities within different areas can take power regionally, without doing so nationally. The survival of the state of Pakistan as a functioning entity cannot be assumed.
47. But the ISI has a history of Islamist influence.
Why has Pakistan “failed” as a nation, whereas India seems to have thrived?
51. Islam?
Perhaps the most important televised statement George Bush has had to make for some time.
I am sure the world will watch carefully.
President Bush, vacationing at his Texas ranch, has been “informed about the situation in Pakistan,” said the White House, which offered no other immediate comment. “We condemn the acts of violence which took place today in Pakistan,” said a spokesman. The president was expected to make a televised statement on the assassination at 11 a.m. ET.
Al Jazeera. Some discussions within the presidential house that the elections could be postponed.
Musharaff is having a cabinet meeting now to discuss the assassination and its effect on the election.
52 Probably a significant factor, but not the only one, surely?
51 — some would say India has thrived (compared to Pakistan) only in the past couple of decades.
52 — dictatorship, imo.
50: This is a bigger than Pakistan. Why have India and China succeeded, and Africa and Pakistan (say) usually not. A lot of it (not all though) seems to ride on having a deeply embedded culture with an agreed legal system, even if its not very liberal or western. Shintoism has been as good for Japan in this respect as Judao-Christian beliefs have been for us. See also India and China
Pakistan was created by ethnic cleansing in 1947 as much as anything else. Although Hindus moved in to India from Pakistan, as a proportion it was a smaler part.
Its nothing to do with Islam per se. Other countries that are Islamic have prospered, even if you don’t like how they divide their economy up.
re 48 well not being a local party member I don’t know for sure but I’m sure some of the shenanigans in Birmingham and the creation of various sub-Muslim parties have had a touch of that about it. I would disagree entirely with you view that a predominantly Asian constituency should have an Asian MP - and it doesn’t seem like a very liberal view. After all in almost every constituency the majority electorate is elderly and female - certianly so for the voters, but that doesn’t make it reasonable that all MPs should be elderly women.
re 53. What did Bush say then - no mention of it on BBC?
Despite the West’s bidding it appears that the other main opposition leader has suggested that elections should not go on.
He’s also demanding Musharraf goes first…..
58. Disagree. I think a large part of Pakistan’s problem is Islam. Though its not the only cause, naturally.
There are few examples of Islamic countries thriving - unless they have enormous reserves of oil. Even then, they can screw it up - Iraq and Iran are classic examples.
Malaysia is one of the very rare examples of an Islamic country that has done well despite having no oil - and it has special circumstances (large energetic Chinese and Indian minority, inheritance of good colonial government, booming Asian neighbours, etc)
Islam is a noble religion, but it generally militates against free expression, intellectual enquiry, true individualism and technological and scientific enterprise. All the Arab countries put together publish fewer books per year than… Spain.
Islam also suppresses women, and if half your population is kept indoors and/or illiterate its hard to compete with countries that better utilise the potential of all citizens.
Islam needs a reformation, there are hopeful signs it may happen. It will probably come from the westernised Muslim diaspora. Until it happens, strongly Islamic countries not blessed by oil wealth will probably struggle.
60 - he made a short statement condemning the assassination and calling for democracy in Pakistan, saying it was the cause Bhutto “died for”.
51. Pakistan has large ungovernable areas of territory in its Northwest Frontier. Even the might of the British Empire couldn’t sedate this area, despites decades of efforts.
58. India and China have thousands of years of advanced civilisation. Sub-Saharan Africa was still a tribal society until colonialism. Since when did Judeo-Christian beliefs cause democracy? Have Ethiopia or Armenia been bastions of freedom? And absolutist France until the secularists took over? Equally democracy had nothing to do with Shintoism in Japan: democracy was imposed by the Americans after military catastrophe.
40 Equally, Assad dynasty in Syria have ruled from the Shia side, against a majority Sunni population even greater - ?70 - 30 or 80 - 20 IIRC. My feeling however, is that Iran would not be immediately interested in “intervening” in Pakistan, unless the instability directly threatened their interest as they saw it.
SeanT: “All the Arab countries put together publish fewer books per year than… Spain.”
Sean, is it possible to cite this please? Am not doubting it, just interested.
59 Thanks, Chris A. When you said “I would disagree entirely with you view that a predominantly Asian constituency should have an Asian MP - and it doesn’t seem like a very liberal view”, I think you might have misunderstood the point I was trying to make. I am not saying that a predominantly Asian cnstituency SHOULD have an Asian MP - just that it seems reasonable if it happens. In the same way, Scottish seats have predominently Scottish (not English or Welsh) MPs.
Very sad to hear the news this afternoon, RIP indeed.
A real woman of courage - refusing to hide away or stay silent despite facing such danger on a regular basis. My first reaction should have been of shock, but it was just a resigned sadness. My perceptions of Pakistan are such that I have come to expect violence to be part of their political process. We aimed to liberate the Middle East but have become so accustomed to violence as a way of culture we have stopped being outraged, as we should be. I hear of many people killed in a suicide bombing and jst shrug - I know this is appalling but I have heard the news so many times.
I wish we could be resensitised to what is going on. If we could, I think we would start to deal with the causes of this culture of violence and extremism. Agree that elections will need to be postponed, for a period of mourning I’d expect, and depending on the rioting, the state of emergency could come back. No short term fixes, and a grim outlook. A sad day for Pakistan, a sad day for democracy.
“Islam is a noble religion, but it generally militates against free expression, intellectual enquiry, true individualism and technological and scientific enterprise.”
“Islam also suppresses women, and if half your population is kept indoors and/or illiterate its hard to compete with countries that better utilise the potential of all citizens.”
Exactly the same could have been said about Catholicism a hundred years ago.
59. And of course there was the People’s Justice Party in Birmingham - essentially a Kashmiri group.
But we aren’t talking about the past, we’re talking about the present. And the very fact you’re comparing modern Islam with Catholicism 100 years ago speaks for itself.
69. Agreed, indeed I considered making that point in my comment. Almost everything that can be said, negatively, of Islamist countries could have been said about, say, Catholic Ireland in the 19th century (or even the early 20th). Or indeed of Mormon Utah in the 1950s!
66. Trying to find the direct citation for my example,but here’s something similar I just located (in some blog):
‘Intellectual isolation is a widespread Arab phenomenon, not just an Iraqi one. Some of the statistics are startling. According to the United Nations’ 2003 “Arab Human Development Report,” five times more books are translated annually into Greek, a language spoken by just 11 million people, than into Arabic. “No more than 10,000 books were translated into Arabic over the entire past millennium,” says the U.N., “equivalent to the number translated into Spanish each year.”‘
re 67 thanks for clarifying that. There’s much to be said that in a ward like mine (which incidentally is about equally split into white/Asian/black) where the white population can’t get off it’s collective arse to be involved in the political process, then it is entirely reasonable.
Sean
Islam in early medieval times often led the search for intellectual advance. My own knowledge of Islam is not particularly strong, but I would tend to agree that there is a need (as there was earlier in Christianity’s history) to adapt and change to new world circumstances. Whether you believe in any religion or not, there is no doubt that they become less relevant if they resist change, and if they cling to outdated “customs” and systems of behaviour.
66. Found it. Ibrahim Eissa, an Egyptian journalist, quotes the same UNHD report:
“You also find out that the total number of books produced in the entire Arab world is less than the number of books published by Spain per year.”
The entire and eye-opening article is here:
http://tinyurl.com/ysgony
72. Or indeed Protestantism in Prussia. As tempting (and it is tempting) as it is to view religious differences as the cause for different political paths, I just don’t think the evidence backs it up. I actually think that the reverse is true: the regime in power, whether democratic or absolutist, adapts the original religion to justify its system of governance. I would say the cultural origin of democracy actually lies with the emergence of a numerous merchant class. If that class successfully makes a claim for power, democracy and middle class values pervade society and its religion. If not, aristocratic values and religion continue.
Excellent, cheers Sean, I have noted both.
62 Malaysia has oodles of oil. Petronas is the malay national oil company.
76. We disagree. I have travelled widely in Islamic countries and… well…. it is hard not to believe the tenets of Islam have something to do with the “backwardness” of Islamic countries. It’s like saying communism had nothing to do with the dire state of Russia in 1978, it was the climate or the geography that led to Soviet decay.
Hm.
Anyway I think my point is made in the article I linked to - in comment 75.
That’s not to say Islam is “bad”. It is very arguable that Islam makes people happier than bourgeois western materialism. Though this is impossible to prove, I subjectively think it might well be true.
But in terms of pure economic development and intellectual advance, as we understand it, Islam is fairly bad news.
78 But Malaysia also has a large middle class of merchants, who were predominantly Chinese and Indian.
78. Yes, I was a bit glib there - Malaysia does have oil. What I meant, and should have said, was overwhelming supplies of oil wealth per capita, like the Emirates.
79. I think we do actually agree. My point is that, had democracy taken hold there, Islam would now be interpreted very differently, selectively focusing on the nice bits and ignoring the rest (like Christianity now does).
But when an aristocratic class maintains power, there is no such liberalising effect and the religion stays the same. The ruling class encourages unbending traditionalism in all matters as this justifies its rule. The unflexible, backwards-remaining religion then holds back development further - which the present form of Islam undeniably does.
However, I think the effect would be the same regardless of what religion you started out with.
82. Ah, I see what you mean. Your point was subtler than I understood - my apologies, I have a cold!
But I still slightly disagree with you. I think that, because of the structure, history and provenance of Islam, it has militant fundamentalism in its DNA. There is no Islamic “church” to reform, so it will always be susceptible to literalist interpretations, which seek to outdo each other in their zeal - Deobandi, Wahhabism, etc etc.
Put it another way, the terroir of Islam does not favour the cultured vines of liberalism.
New thread - How will Pakistan affect the White House race?