Michael Pollak wrote:
> On Thu Dec 27 10:42:31 PST 2007, John Adams wrote:
>
>> What do you think this assassination is going to bring on?
>
> Since everyone else is talking lip of the volcano, I'm going to take a
> contrarian view, just for the sake of discussion. I think the most likely
> next moves in the realm of high politics will actually be a slight advance
> in the right direction for Pakistan, towards getting rid of Musharref and
> renovating the PPP.
>
> I think the US will now support Aitzaz Ahsan. He is most famous over the
> last year as the most prominent leader in the lawyer's movement. He
> represented the Chief Justice in court and got him released. He is also a
> high official of the PPP (he was interior minister in a previous Bhutto
> government) and probably the most popular guy both inside the party and
> out because he was adamantly against the Bhutto-Musharef deal from the
> beginning and never wavered. He was already "interviewed" in Washington
> last month and seemed to get a very good reception. He had nothing but
> good press in the US (which I assume would have slagged him if the
> government officials had indicated so) and he placed a very prominent Op
> Ed in the NYT. The main problems with appointing him was that Bhutto
> didn't like him at all, and liked him less after this treatment marked him
> as a serious rival. And then of course there was Musharref -- elevating
> this guy was impossible if the US was keeping Mush.
>
> But the US would like to get rid of Mush. At this point his unpopularity
> is clearly a huge minus. This is Imperial SOP for the US and especially
> in Pakistan: we use them up and throw 'em away (not that they don't
> deserve the throwing away part). The key barrier to this was that Mush
> controlled the army. That's now been taken care of. The only element in
> the Bhutto/Mushareff deal that worked was getting him to take off his
> uniform and appoint a new chief of the army, General Ashfaq Kiyani.
>
> Right after Mushareff declared emergency and threw out the supreme court
> and arrested all the lawyers, Negroponte came to visit, ostensibly to
> register his very mild public protest, but perhaps to indicate that the
> bottom line that the US demanded was at least that Mush become a civilian;
> at any rate, that is the only part of the deal he kept. And on that same
> visit, when Kiyani was still in waiting as the vice chief of the Army
> Staff Negroponte had three meetings with Kiyani to one with Musharref. A
> couple of days later, CENTCOM Admiral Fallon showed up to meet with
> Kiyani. I assume from the purely good coverage Ashfaq Kiyani got in the US
> press, both liked him. (Just for the record, Fallon seems fairly sensible
> as CENTCOMs go. FWIW, he's been the most prominent person in a position
> of power fighting publicly against the idea of bombing Iran).
>
> So that looks like the logical next move, one way or another: an election
> (in conjunction with other maneuvers in law and perhaps outside it) that
> elevates Aitzaz and dismisses Mushareff, with the power of the army now in
> the control Kiyani. You never know until they are appointed, but both of
> them seem like they'd be a step forward. The elevation of Aitzaz would
> instantly make the PPP more democratic by replacing the chairperson for
> life with someone who isn't part of a dynastic family. It would also
> marrying the party to what is one of the most lively secular popular
> moments Pakistan has had in decades. And on the other hand, from what
> little we know from the fawning coverage, Kiyani doesn't seem to have
> thus far exhibited any signs of meglomania; he seems distinguished in fact
> by his desire to stay out of politics.
>
> So if all that happened, it looks on its face like it would actually be a
> beetle leg forward for this long suffering country. It's too bad that
> path there goes through murder and riot.
>
> And of course, we might just get the murder and riot and not get any of
> this. But I think of all the many possible scenarios, this is the most
> likely. Although maybe it's likely in a plurality of the votes sense, and
> not in a better than 50/50 chance sense.
>
> Michael
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>