The President goes a-visiting! - The Prime Minister and the Parliament continue to cool their heels!

That our President-elect has a lively disposition is no secret. His ever smiling visage is a familiar sight on the screens of all TV channels. The enthusiasm, with which he embraces "big brother" Nawaz Sharif, whenever he runs into him, is also well known. In fact, every time he breaks a commitment with "big brother" he makes it up with him with a yet more enthusiastic embrace.
You may recall that he even lifted Chaudhry Nisar off his feet in one such embrace during a meeting of the erstwhile coalition partners. In short, Zardari is a man with a lively disposition. A manifestation of this was again visible when he came face to face with Sarah Palin, the Vice Presidential candidate of the Republican party of America during his recent "unofficial" visit to that country.
One look at her, and he "knew" why American people were "crazy about her" and did not hesitate to tell her so! He even expressed his readiness to hug her if the press reporters so desired! No doubt this is a great tribute to the VP candidate's personal charm, but then the American people are looking forward to qualities other than looks in their Vice President, who, as they are fond of saying, is only a heartbeat away from the Presidency, should anything untoward happen to the President.
Therefore they expect their Vice President to be a person who commands respect for his/her wisdom, acumen, and decision-making and crisis-handling capabilities and not for his/her good looks. No wonder then, that our President's remarks caused embarrassment on the occasion and were widely seen as improper back home in Pakistan. The remarks were considered particularly offensive in view of the fact that only a few hours earlier at the UN, the President was waxing eloquent on his personal loss and sorrow in the tragic death of Benazir. In fact he had started his talk at the UN, a few hours before the Sarah Palin episode, by showing her photograph to the august gathering and had followed up by talking about her at considerable length, to the exclusion of various matters of vital importance to Pakistan.
WAS THE VISIT NECESSARY?
The purpose and need of the visit to America by our President at this time has been the subject of much comment in the media. Rather than make his first visit abroad to China, after election and elevation to the top job, which has been the tradition of all chief executives of Pakistan in the past, Zardari chose to first make an "unofficial" visit to England to be present on the occasion of his daughter's entry into college. He had also declared his intention of using the visit to discuss the subject of American forays into Pakistani territory although Gordon Brown's position in the matter was known to be fairly close to the American position.
This appeared to be quite in line with his habit (even before he became President) of making a beeline for abroad (often to Dubai) during critical situations at home, and staying there for long periods. Our President chose to visit America ostensibly to address the United Nations General Assembly. But he also spent most of his time meeting various politicians and members of the American government as well as some Chief Executives of states including India, France and America. He also addressed the Friends of Pakistan club which is expected to announce a loan package for Pakistan but does not appear to be in a hurry to do so.
WHAT WAS THE NET RESULT OF ALL THE PAINS PRESIDENT ZARDARI TOOK?
The answer is not much. In fact, much was given away for nothing in return! In the first place President Zardari chose to meet the American President and other politicians at a time when that country is in the throes of hectic election activity and no one there is in any mood to engage with any one except the American voter.
Moreover, President Bush's popularity and support for his policies, internal and external, is and has been for some considerable time now, at a historic low, so much so that even his own party's nominees for election to the Presidency and Vice Presidency, John McCain and Sarah Palin are avoiding him like the plague and Bush was conspicuous by his absence at the Republican Party convention which chose its candidates for President and Vice President. Zardari has chosen to use the occasion to lavish praise on Bush and his extremely unpopular policies.
Among other things, he has said that Bush's policies have reduced the risk of terrorism in the world and made it a safer place. This view is quite opposite of the views of an overwhelming majority of people in America itself as well as in other parts of the world including Pakistan.
He has also aligned himself so closely with America on "war against terror" that the Parliament or the Government in Pakistan are left with no room to maneuver to any position other than kowtowing the American position. In his UN address, on the other hand, Zardari made only a passing reference to the Kashmir issue, which must cause a lot of heart burning among the people of occupied Kashmir, presently painting the streets red with their blood in pursuit of their freedom from foreign occupation and for their right of self-determination. In the meantime our Parliament and the Government continue to be kept out of any part in the policy making process.
When it finally meets on 8 October 08, as projected, the Parliament will find that most of the decisions on matters of national importance have already been taken by the President and positions on most matters have already been firmed up leaving it no room for a meaningful, post election review. War on terror is now supposed to be our own war, America is supposed to be helping us in this war and Kashmir can wait. Building a national consensus in the country or in the Parliament seems to be a far cry now.
Likewise, more than two weeks after Zardari took oath as President, even the first steps towards amending the constitution to rid it of the 17th amendment and the 58(2)b clause, have yet to be taken since the committee which was to "visit" (note the word) these issues is yet to be formed. Do we recall Zardari saying that one of the first things the President would do after taking oath would be to give up his powers under 58(2)b?
IS NOT CREDIBILITY IMPORTANT?
The terrorist attack on Marriot in Islamabad on Saturday 20 September 08, exposed the dismal state of credibility of our elected leaders. Prime Minister Gilani told reporters on Sunday 21 September 08 at the Lahore Airport that PM's house was the target of the terrorists "where political leaders and other key figures were attending a dinner. But the bomber could not reach there because of tight security arrangements". On Monday 22 September 08, Rehman Malik had a different story to tell at Chaklala Airbase while handing over the body of the Czech Ambassador who was killed in the blast, to the Czech authorities! He said "the real target of the suicide bomber were the President, the Prime Minister and other leaders who were to attend the Iftar originally scheduled at the (Marriot) hotel.
However, because of security concerns the event was moved to the PM House". Within hours on the same day (Monday), however, the Jamil Khawar, spokesman for Marriot Hotel owner Sadruddin Hshwani, stated that "there was no reservation from the government side", thus flatly contradicting Malik's statement. Despite all this, President Zardari thought fit to claim on Wednesday 24 September 08 in New York, that the Marriot blast in Islamabad on Saturday was directed against him!
KARZAI'S OFFER TO TALIBAN:
Two very interesting and eye-opening (for our President) developments are making headlines as these lines are being written. "My brother, my dear, come back to your homeland, come and work for the peace and good of your people and stop killing your brothers" were the words with which President Karzai (as he informed reporters earlier in the week) made an appeal to Mullah Omar, the Taliban leader. He also appealed to the King of Saudi Arabia for help in the matter. Mullah Umer firmly and promptly rejected the idea of entering into any discussions with the Karzai's government as long as foreign troops were present in the country.
The other development was a categorical and forthright statement to Sunday Times, by no less than the British commander in Helmand, Brigadier Mark Carleton-Smith, as late as Sunday 5 October 08, that the aim of the British mission in Afghanistan was to ensure that the Afghan army was able to manage the country on its own but that this involved discussions with the Taliban. Earlier French diplomats had said that international troops were not winning in Afghanistan.
Contrast this with our own policy of lumping together large sections of the population in NWFP under the catch-all misnomer of Taliban and declaring in effect a fight to the finish against them. Another potentially disastrous development is the beginning of civil strife between different groups within in the province apparently with the support and encouragement of our government. This could leave festering scars in the area long after the strife is over. ([email protected])