[A-List] West Asks If Musharraf Is Dispensable

["Yoshie Furuhashi" <critical.montages@xxxxxxxxx>]

<http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/Europe/West_asks_if_Musharraf_is_dispensable/articleshow/2050626.cms>
West asks if Musharraf is dispensable
16 May, 2007 l 0014 hrs ISTlRASHMEE ROSHAN LALL/TIMES NEWS NETWORK

LONDON: Seven years after General Musharraf seized control, Pakistan's
continuing unrest and political turmoil may have set the clock ticking
for the military dictator with Western capitals finally asking the
loaded question: "Is Musharraf dispensable?"

In a significant loss of support for the General, hitherto rock-solid
and well-supported ally of the Andlo-American coalition in the
so-called 'war on terror', Western commentators said on Tuesday that
Pakistan's crisis had 'reached boiling point'.

Even as diplomats sent the 21st-century equivalent of urgent "telegram
despatches" from Islamabad to European capitals, leading commentators
described the General's escalating problems as a moment of truth for
him and the Washington-London axis that supports him.

In its lead editorial on Tuesday, wittily titled 'General unrest', The
Guardian asked, "How long will he (Musharraf) be able to carry on?"
Identifying one of the General's major headaches as a protest "by the
very elites — middle-class lawyers and bureaucrats — who supported the
General's attempts to clean up the country's corrupt political class
when he took over seven years ago," the paper said "today, the
military ruler is looking to many of the middle class who supported
his coup, as if he has passed his sell-by date".

It ended, on a grave note of warning for Washington and London to
ration its support for Musharraf, "It is not elections that beckon,
but a state of emergency... America's chief regional ally in the war
on terror is in the biggest crisis of his political and military
life".

The Financial Times similarly editorialised dolefully that "General
Musharraf's determination to be re-elected president while staying on
as head of the army has led him into a political blind alley". It
commented that the Pakistan president "is now in danger of forfeiting
western support" and recommended Musharraf "do what he first promised
— engineer a transition back to democracy. His allies should try to
persuade him to hold a general election, step down as army commander
and then stand, out of uniform, as a candidate in a presidential
election."

It said, "The Pakistani president is elected indirectly, being chosen
by a college of the upper and lower houses of parliament and the four
state parliaments. It is a risk for Musharraf, but one worth taking.
Given the economic record of which he boasts, there is a good chance
he would win."

In yet another editorial note of caution, The Independent said "the
greatest challenge to President Musharraf's authority since he took
power" could not be explained simply by going back to Pakistan's
troubled tryst with democracy. Even as the paper acknowledged that
"Since its foundation, Pakistan has been a complex and unstable
country", it insisted that "even by such turbulent standards, this
represents a major crisis. At the heart of the matter is the position
of President Musharraf."

The press comment on Pakistan's very visible disarray chimes with the
view of Western diplomatic observers who believe it may be growing
increasingly difficult for Washington and London to overlook the
embarrassing reality that Musharraf heads a military dictatorship.
Observers say the General's refusal to "regularise his position" may
become increasingly difficult for the West to sweep under the carpet
with Pakistan widely believing Musharraf dismissed Chief Justice
Iftikhar Chaudhry because he wanted a more obedient figure at the head
of the judiciary in case of a constitutional challenge to his position
after the November elections as Pakistan's president and army chief.

But in a noteworthy piece spelling out the realpolitik aspects of
Musharraf's troubled situation, The Guardian's Simon Tisdall pointed
out that Washington and London's continued support is measured in the
following terms — "hunting down Al Qaida, disrupting local connections
to terror cells and networks in the West and pacifying Afghanistan".

These, said Tisdall, "are key benchmarks" for continued Western
support but growing impatience with Musharraf's track record in
Western capitals could not hide one key fact: unless the West finds "a
credible successor who will continue to support US policies",
Washington and London may find it better "to continue to work with
Musharraf despite his shortcomings".
--
Yoshie