There's a definite change in the political landscape of Pakistan, even if President Bush seems determined to ignore it.
On Thursday hundreds of lawyers and civil society activists tried to storm the barricades outside the Islamabad house of the imprisoned former chief justice, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. Lawyers in suits, ties and gardening gloves ripped back coils of barbed wire, only to be confronted with a phalanx of policemen armed with teargas and water canon. "Go Musharraf, go!" chanted the crowd - a mantra that has haunted the president since his botched attempted to fire Chaudhry last March. Musharraf despises the judge even more than he does Sharif; in a recent interview he described him as "the scum of the earth".
But unlike previous protests, the police did not baton charge or thrash the protesters - at least not very much - and only a few teargas canisters were fired, which landed half-heartedly in a nearby garden. When the crowd dispersed peacefully, one lawyer shook hands briefly with a policeman in riot gear, who smiled back.
"Things have changed," said the organiser, Athar Minallah. "Today Musharraf is obviously not in power, and that is the beauty of democracy.
So the police, who until now have been acting in a manner indistinguishable from Musharraf's henchmen, are beginning to send out a different signal. Things have changed in Pakistan and the police appear to have realised this.
Of course, the person who doesn't seem to have fully comprehended what has taken place in Pakistan is George Bush, who has wasted no time letting everyone know how much he wishes Musharraf to stay in his present position.
Senior officials from all parties told the Guardian they were trying to broker a deal that would ensure Musharraf stays in power. The PML (Q) official said his party was being pressured by US embassy officials hoping for a coalition between their party with Benazir Bhutto's Pakistan People's party, now led by her widower, Asif Ali Zardari.
"The Americans want a German-style grand coalition including the PPP," he said. "They want Musharraf to stick around, even if it's a diminished Musharraf."
British officials have been more coy, bristling at suggestions they are following the American lead. But many Pakistanis believe Whitehall is singing from a hymn sheet drawn up in the White House.
"The British are masters at using their language; the Americans are more crude. But in the end, it comes down to the same thing," said Nadir Chaudhri, a Sharif aide.
Now, the reason that Musharraf is so valuable to the west is that he has promised to continue the war on terror and there are fears that his successor, General Ashfaq Kayani, might not be as tough rooting out al Qaeda as Musharraf has been.
This strikes me as simply extraordinary. For what we are saying is that Pakistan must have elections but the one thing the election must not be allowed to change is the policies of Pakistan, especially as they effect western interests. Indeed, by insisting that Musharraf stick around - even in a much diminished condition - we are actually insisting that, nice though the election was, it really shouldn't produce a change in leadership.
George Bush's desire to export democracy has always been a dreadful sham but surely nothing renders this more obvious than this? The people of Pakistan may decide that their interests and ours no longer collude. This would be regrettable, but surely that is their democratic right?
Bush, and it would appear Britain, are working behind the scenes to ensure that this election changes nothing which would harm
our interests, not the interests of the people of Pakistan.
But many Pakistanis are angry at what they see as American meddling, even among pro-western parties.
"The US has to understand that the parties now elected to parliament are not stooges of Musharraf. They are genuinely elected people," said Senator Enver Baig, of Bhutto's PPP.
The truth of this statement has apparently filtered through to Musharraf, who is said to be brooding in Army House, recently renamed Presidential Lodge after he was forced to stand down from the army.
"He's been sulking," said a senior party official. "He's retreated into a mental bunker, which is not healthy. He thinks everyone is out to get him and only listens to a small circle. It's a dangerous mindset to be in at this point in time. He could decide to hit back."
Musharraf is one of the few world leaders who threw his hat into the ring with George Bush, though to be fair, Musharraf had slightly less choice than the others. When Colin Powell contacted Pakistan shortly after 9-11
the message he had for Musharraf was stark.The phone call from the US's then secretary of state Colin Powell that woke Musharraf with the news of the attacks in Washington and New York offered him a straight choice: Washington or the Taliban. For Musharraf, it was more than an easy decision - it was a godsend. Since his dismissal of an elected government in October 1999, the military ruler had become a pariah in the west, and the 9/11 attacks were a quick route to recover lost (or never gained) legitimacy, as well as a vanguard role in the unfolding war.
At the time, it must have seemed like a heaven sent opportunity for Musharraf. But, like Blair, Berlusconi and Aznar; Musharraf has come to pay a very high price for aligning himself to the war on terror, especially amongst his own electorate.
So now he sits, alone and brooding, Bush's last standing ally in the war on a noun, as democratic forces swirl around him and attempt to unseat him, while Bush - the very man who claimed his presidency was dedicated to spreading democracy around the world - clings to the hope that he can retain Musharraf and ignore the people of Pakistan's democratic decision.
Click title for full article.
Why is John McCain allowed to welcome an endorsement from the Rev. John C. Hagee, whilst Barack Obama is forced to denounce - nay, reject - the endorsement of Minister Louis Farrakhan, despite the fact that Obama never sought this endorsement?
