| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Afghanistan/South Asia | |
| Military-Mullah Alliance | |
| 2004-05-28 | |
| EFL There have been at least three attempts by religious fanatics to knock off General Musharraf. The intelligence agencies know that the would-be assassins are members of, or have strong links to, well known militant religious organisations based in Pakistan. Yet the leaders of these groups are free to roam about and make virulent speeches against General Musharrafâs âenlightenedâ policies. Whatâs stopping him from shutting them up? The evidence suggests that the historical Military-Mullah Alliance (MMA) is alive and kicking. It was actively nurtured in the 1980s by General Zia ul Haq to flog the establishmentâs regional ambitions in Afghanistan. But this was at the expense of the Pakistan Peoples Party and civil society at home. In the 1990s, the MMAâs regional ambitions were focused on jihad in Indian-held Kashmir. Thus the Bhutto government was dismissed at its behest in 1990 for being âsoftâ on India and the Nawaz government met the same fate in 1999 for objecting to Kargil.
The government has broken every rule in the book to foist the Maulana as Speaker of the National Assembly. But the Rules of Business in the NA say that â Leader of the Opposition means a member who in the opinion of the Speaker is for the time being leader of the majority of the members in the oppositionâ. Thus the Maulanaâs claim of 68 votes currently should have been matched against 79 by the PPP-PMLNâs Amin Fahim. Instead, the Speaker accounted for Maulana Rehmanâs 87 votes 14 months ago during the election of the prime minister and not the PPPâs largest tally of 81 at the time of oath taking. Why this hanky-panky? The answer is that the Military-Mullah Alliance in 2002 had to be micromanaged into becoming the Musharraf-Maulana Alliance in 2004 to ensure one key objective by each player: General Musharraf needed the support of the MMA for the 17th amendment and Maulana Fazlur Rehman wanted to become leader of the âalternative government in waitingâ. That deal has now come to fruition by hook and by crook. But the underlying tension between General Musharrafâs âvision and realityâ â his abhorrence of the fundamentalism of the mullahs and fanatics versus his personal-political need to make alliances with them â is bound to become acute over time. Just as the jihadis who are part of the MMA are out to get General Musharraf, the MMA continues to attack him relentlessly. In short, the religious parties are all for the institutional Military-Mullah Alliance but against the person of General Musharraf while General Musharraf is personally against the mullahs and all for the Musharraf-Maulana Alliance! That is why General Musharraf rails against religious extremists while making alliances with them and that is why the mullahs rail against General Musharraf and seek fresh alliances with the military at the same time. | |
| Posted by:Paul Moloney |
| #4 Considering this is the only muslim country with nukes, do you wonder that getting rid of the Perv and declaring an islamic theocracy is a main strategic goal? |
| Posted by: Mercutio 2004-05-28 5:28:54 PM |
| #3 Raptor---The one that sticks in my craw the most was reading a reporter's text of having a bunch of Taliban bottled up in a town in the north of Afghanistan near Mazaar-e-sharrif, and his amazement of seeing aircraft going in and out when the Taliban were under seige. Turns out that there were a bunch of Pakistani officers in there too, and we had to make some kind of deal with Perv to save their sorry asses from annhilation. Gaaaaak! |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2004-05-28 12:03:07 PM |
| #2 "Definatlly twisted" All of the compromises are going to come back and bite us on the ass. |
| Posted by: Raptor 2004-05-28 7:12:45 AM |
| #1 Latin Americans refer to Mushy practices of string-pulling GWB while indulging jihadis, as: doble cara (two-faced). Paki support for Taliban/al-Qaeda should have signalled the beginning of the end of their sick country after 9-11. Instead... LA Times, on GWB's settlement with that closet pacifist - al-Sadr: "If accepted, the plan would allow Sadr to remain free in Najaf for the time being and clear the way for him to transform his militia into a legitimate political party." "It is the second time in recent weeks that U.S. officials have found it necessary to step back from their original aims in order to end bloodshed." "In the battle over the Sunni Muslim stronghold of Fallouja, U.S. officials dropped demands that insurgents there be "pacified" and surprised many by pulling out of the city and handing over authority to a former general in Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's army. U.S. troops had entered Fallouja after the killings and mutilations of four American civilian contractors..." Hmmm. When GWB chose to force armistice arrangements between the Northern Alliance and Afghan Talibanis, he set the stage for status quo war, in the name of "freedom." How about freedom-from Islamofascist koranimals? Kill them all. |
| Posted by: Dog Bites Trolls 2004-05-28 3:56:38 AM |