Friday, November 30, 2007

THE DEVIL WHISPERS AND NEVER YELLS


by Malik Isasis























November 27, 2007: Bush said. "With their violent actions and contempt for human life, the extremists are seeking to impose a dark vision on the Palestinian people: a vision that feeds on hopelessness and despair to sow chaos in the Holy Land. If this vision prevails, the future of the region will be endless terror, endless war, and endless suffering."

Bush’s inabilities to self reflect allows him to speak oxymoronically about the very thing he blame others for doing, mainly committing”endless terror, endless war, and endless suffering.” The corporate media obfuscates Bush’s mental latency because their parent companies are the very pirates who benefit from war and destruction and what Naomi Klein referred to as Disaster Capitalism.

Caveman Cometh

On November 29, 2007, CNN facilitated another Roman Circus that supposed to pass as political debate. The Republican Presidential candidates knuckled their way onto the stage with their canned 90-second responses and 30-second rebuttals. The debate was moderated by the CNN’s Anderson Cooper who did not disappoint his corporate handlers by focusing his facilitation on illegal immigration. In fact, the first 30 minutes of the debate was spent with Republicans playing one-upmanship in xenophobic, white supremacist, and false sense of moral superiority canned speeches.

It’s clear for those who are willing to lift the veil that the corporate media and their political meat puppets have worked out the time limit and rules of debate. Why is it that our political choices give themselves only 90 seconds to respond to a question and 30 seconds to rebuttal? Will they turn into a pumpkin if they go beyond the chosen allotted time? Imagine if Bush had 45 unscripted minutes to lay out his vision for the future, versus say Al Gore or John Kerry. Bush’s lack of imagination, his inability to grasp concepts and articulate them would have surely made him look like the dip shit that he is…but as I said before, it is the corporate media’s gig to try and pull the wool over our eyes and pretend that we are getting insight into the droids that are marched out onto the stage with canned answers. That ain't fresh.

I was only able to tolerate 35 minutes of the debate. The hatred toward Mexicans, the jingoistic circle jerk was puerile and allowed Republicans to escape responsibility for their K-9 fidelity on Bush's destructive plans for the world and the collapsing of the United States' economy.

The collusion between the politicians and the corporate media to short change us of ideas, imagination and creativity has resulted in elected officials who lack ideas, imagination and creativity.

The corporate whores who sponsor our politicians have trained them to see us as consumers, and if we are seen as consumers then we are seen as fools.

Wednesday, November 28, 2007

Pakistan Needs Restructuring, Not Elections
A 5 Point Roadmap for Reform


By Maliha Masood, Matrix Correspondent















There is a reason why you can’t find better alternatives when talking about a post-Musharraf Pakistan. Pakistani political parties never developed into viable institutions capable of generating leadership. And you can’t blame this one on entirely on the Pakistani military.

When all is said and done, Pervez Musharraf remains the best option from a lesser of evils scenario. A corrupt and two-faced Benazir Bhutto will be disastrous for the country. While lauded by the media for her pro-democracy stance, Benazir is in fact completely dependent on the military for her power base and to assume otherwise is to be fooled by appearances alone. Make no mistake. If Benazir assumes power, she will not be wielding it single-handedly, but at the mercy and command of her invisible backers, which includes the United States. In other words, hers will be a puppet regime and we can all guess where that will lead.

Without a doubt, Musharraf has miserably failed in using his immense powers, backed by the powerful Pakistani military institution, in redesigning the failed Pakistani political system. Multiple power centers at the top have made the system unstable, resulting in perennial turf wars over the past six decades. The current power struggle in Pakistan is probably one of the ugliest manifestations of this damaged system. This time the domestic infighting is sending the wrong signals abroad.

To make a case for why Pakistan needs the military is to risk alienation from bleeding heart liberals and democrats, but again this is where one needs to be wary of appearances. The image of a Pakistani lawyer handcuffed by the police is not an automatic statement that freedom and justice is under attack. Some of the lawyers arrested were charged with abuse of office, giving away jobs to relatives as a way of doling out favors. For Pakistani elites, with ties to power brokers, getting out of trouble is only a phone call away, and all the important numbers are programmed on their mobile speed dials.

Speaking from a realist's point of view, there are deep structural and constitutional problems within Pakistani politics that necessitate the presence of Pakistani military in civil affairs for the time being. Only the military can help break the choking grip of wealthy, autocratic feudal politicians. And the most frustrating part is that the military is just as much part of the solution as well as the problem.

Encouraging the monopoly of a handful of politicians in the country, perpetuating a troubled system and never encouraging its replacement with a better one is the ongoing legacy of military rule. Any transition to democracy has to slow and calibrated. Oddly enough, pro-democratic expressions in Pakistan came about under a military-led government.

The most revealing example of this is the free and independent media that flourished during the past eight years in Pakistan, a fact not widely known to the rest of the world in the face of the recent media crackdowns by Musharraf. Another success story during military rule has been the economy. At one point, Karachi's stock exchange (KSE) was rated the best emerging stock index anywhere in the world. Pakistan today is ranked 76th by the World Bank in terms of ease of doing business, way ahead of India, for example, at 120th.

Of course, none of this means that a permanent military-led government is the answer for Pakistan. What it means is that the military, for all its negative associations, has had a role in reforming Pakistani politics. And it must embrace this role as a strategic objective. The reforms must be sustainable and the end goal is a healthy democracy with full transparency and accountability.

What Pakistan needs today more than anything else is restructuring and remodeling. Elections are an unnecessary distraction, a placebo effect designed to satisfy the international community. And going by past experience, elections at the wrong time will push Pakistan into more political controversies.

The unfortunate thing is that President Musharraf failed to introduce any real political reforms. Pakistan’s strong military institution must use its influence to introduce the following five drastic changes to the country’s political system:


1. CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION.
President Musharraf must challenge decaying politics by giving the nation a fresh constitution. Around 1,000 people – that’s the estimated strength of present Pakistani political class – will create some noise. But two-thirds of Pakistanis are below 30 years of age. To them, future is more important than the past. The existing constitution creates conflict, doesn’t reflect ground realities, and cripples Pakistan’s potential as a rising power.


2. A STRONG PRESIDENCY.
Executive power must be strengthened and expanded if we want to see a strong
federal government in Islamabad. This means axing the current parliamentary system. Gen. Musharraf must bolster his position by introducing a presidential form of democracy. This structural change cannot be made permanent without a strong presidency with likeminded professionals in federal offices.

3. MORE PROVINCES.
Pakistan needs to move beyond the current four provinces to at least a dozen or more, with more local governments. This will improve governance, create new local leaderships, weaken linguistic- and ethnic-based politics, and – most importantly – strengthen Pakistani nationalism.


4. A TWO-PARTY SYSTEM.
Stability will continue to elude Pakistan without introducing something close to a two-party system – possibly Pakistan Muslim League [PML] on the right and Pakistan People’s Party [PPP] on the left – alternating power, with a half dozen smaller parties tipping the scale on the sidelines.


5. REFORMING POLITICAL PARTIES.
The Election Commission of Pakistan must introduce the requirement of a verifiable, free and secret ballot for the top slots within Pakistani political parties as a precondition to contesting general elections. This will rid Pakistan of stagnating lifetime party leaderships, giving a larger number of Pakistanis a chance to serve the public and pave the way for a better class of politicians to emerge.

Some would say that President Musharraf could have brought these drastic changes during his eight years as a powerful army chief and president. There’s little chance of him pushing such an ambitious agenda now when he is on his way out.

It’s true that it would have been good if he could retain the command of the armed forces in order to ensure continuity in his role as the author of the new system. But that is secondary. This cannot be a one-man agenda. What is more important is that the Pakistani military leadership sponsors this entire reforms program and makes it a strategic objective, regardless of change of command.

And let’s not worry too much about building political consensus. It would be good if it happens, but it’s near impossible to achieve. Pakistani politics are so divisive today that politicians are incapable of seeing a good idea even if it hits them smack in the face.

Monday, November 26, 2007

BIG PIMPIN'


by Malik Isasis






















OPEC and the multinational oil companies that extract their oil has the world in a head lock as the price for a barrel of oil reaches a $100 a barrel. If some of the OPEC members have their way and switch to the euro from the dollar as a reserve currency, we could expect the price of oil to reach $200 dollars a barrel due to the precipitous fall of the dollar.

Bush’s ineptitude and concerns of raping and pillaging the Middle East has left the United States’ economy in shambles. Another world currency has surpassed the dollar. The Canadian dollar overtook the dollar for the first time since 1976/77. Not that currency parity is a bad thing, but Bush’s preoccupation with death and destruction, ironically has resulted or will result in the destruction of the United States’ economy as Bush and Co. put the trillion dollar war on the credit card.

OPEC expects profits and if the reserve currency is devalued, the price has to be inflated to keep up with the world currencies that are surpassing the dollar. Robert McHugh of Financial Sense predicts that the dollar will lose 50% its value based on insurmountable debt.

Artificial Economics, the brainchild of the Master Planners, has focused on building an economy where debt — not income — pays for goods and services. The emphasis upon debt instead of income via hyper-inflating the money supply in stealth fashion, has destroyed the dreams of millions of Americans. Artificial Economics is a silent economic disease. A coming significant devaluation of the dollar is a likely and necessary consequence.

Reagonomics

As the Republicans debate on CNN this week, watch for them to wax nostalgic about the grandfather of Artificial Economics, the late President Ronald Reagan and his Reaganomic policies that raised the national debt from $700 billion to $3 trillion during his tenure and set the trend for a debt-driven economy.

Bush's father who served as Vice President and subsequently as President held onto Reagan's financial policies and pushed the U.S. into further debt. The idiot savant that sprang from his loins has taken Artificial Economics to a new level with wars, bloody colonization schemes, and an occupation, underwritten by China and Japan, but ultimately will be paid back by the middle class. Listen to the idiot savant's articulation on preserving and growing the economy, here. U.S. government is leading the way in, indebtedness.

What is accomplished by a significant and sudden dollar devaluation? It is a way to pay off debt with suddenly-more-available dollars; cheaper dollars. We have been witnessing a slow meticulous devaluation of the dollar over the past two decades, with an acceleration over the past decade. This has come from an increase in the money supply via the credit creation route — debt.

So, in the words of Bush, "shop more" and why not, the end is nigh.

Wednesday, November 21, 2007

MORAL BANKRUPTCY: PAKISTAN & THE WEST


By Maliha Masood, Matrix Correspondent






















In all the upheaval and turmoil ensuing over the crisis in Pakistan, it would make for a more balanced debate to turn to the West’s own bankruptcy in dealing with this fractured country and its lackluster General. Despite George W Bush's rhetoric about freedom and democracy, the struggle against terrorism has been producing a pattern startlingly familiar from the Cold War and if history serves as a guide, then what is currently happening in Pakistan is but a prelude to what happened roughly two decades earlier.

For starters, let’s revert to the old ways of talking business as recently quoted in London’s Daily Telegraph that General Pervez Musharraf is "our sonofabitch" who has failed to stamp out extremist groups and shut down the nurseries that inspire them. He has eliminated the judiciary knowing the Supreme Court would declare illegal his re-election as president last month. He has curbed the country’s thriving independent media. Last but not least, General M has been unable to control Pakistan’s unruly tribal areas bordering Afghanistan that host a hodgepodge of militant groups, the disgruntled and bored out of their minds so let’s stir up some trouble types, the feuding old clans holding onto grudges from medieval times as well as the nouveau riche ego maniacs using Islam as a power trip. All this is a tall order for anybody to comply with.

If General M were a CEO and Pakistan were a publicly held corporation, chances are that the board of directors, investors and stockholders would have booted him out long ago. Why then, in the face of such clear incompetence, do America and its allies continue to back the General as head of state? Is it because they need him more than he needs them? And because the Bush Administration knows that General Musharraf is still their best bet against religious extremists, just like the Americans under the Carter and Reagan Administrations knew that Pakistan’s then General Zia ul-Haq was their only hope in fighting the Communists occupying next door Afghanistan?

The parallels are too close to ignore. Both Zia and Musharraf trace the beginnings of their careers in the Army. Both leaders seized power in a military coup. Both have installed martial law. In terms of personality and character, Zia and Musharraf might as well be polar opposites. Zia was a somewhat charismatic figure with his mega watt smile and espresso colored eyes, capable of shifting from warm to icy cold in fractions of a second. Zia was also a devout Muslim with unshakeable faith, an ardent believer in the Quran and just cause. He looked rather dashing with his pomaded combed back hair and a buttoned up sherwani in contrast to Musharraf’s drab khaki duds and spectacled poker face.

Thanks to Zia’s courage and shrewdness against impossible odds, the Red Army was brought to a standstill by an impoverished, backwater, third world nation. With help from American money and arms pouring into its coffers to support the mujahedin resistance, along with a cozy alliance between the CIA, MI6 and Pakistan’s ISI intelligence, the Soviets were defeated and fully withdrew from Afghanistan after Mikhail Gorbachev came to power. The demoralizing loss eventually led to the breakup of the Soviet Union and the fall of its Communist Empire, which may not have happened so readily without the blows struck by the Pakistani General Zia ul-Haq in battling one of the world’s most ruthless land powers toward victory. Shortly afterwards, Zia was mysteriously killed in a plane crash, rumored to have been sabotaged, and the new Pakistani government of Benazir Bhutto moved in swiftly. The year was 1988.

Fast forward two decades. Unlike General Zia, General Musharraf does not have to contend with a hostile foreign occupier. He has forces closer to home threatening instability. Many of these forces are offshoots of what happened during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the way it was overcome. The Americans have unfinished business in Pakistan. They need to hold onto Musharraf in order to do their bidding.

To broaden the General’s political base, the plan is to enter into a power-sharing arrangement with the country’s prodigal daughter returned from exile, Benazir Bhutto and her Pakistan’s People’s Party, after general elections in February 2008. If all goes well, Pakistan will get a soldier with bare minimum popularity and a politician with a dubious past laden with corruption, a woman whose standing is not so secure given the recent assassination attempt on her life. The two of them ruling the country together will be like some surreal political spoof of the Odd Couple.

And what will the West, notably, the United States, get in return? A valued ally turned bittersweet nemesis, yes. A worrisome nuclear power reigned in by short-term policies, yes. A fragile Islamic state in the world’s most strategic geopolitical crossroads, yes. And moral bankruptcy all around, most certainly, yes.

Maliha Masood is an award-winning writer and the author of Zaatar Days, Henna Nights. A former policy analyst at the International Crisis Group in Islamabad, she is the founder and president of The Diwaan Project, a Seattle-based cultural institute geared toward public education on global affairs. Maliha teaches a course on women and Islam at the University of Washington and is currently at work on her first novel set in contemporary Pakistan.

Monday, November 19, 2007

NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN


a film review by Malik Isasis
















When does two million dollars become a burden? Well, that all depends on how much two million dollars is worth; for some it is worth life itself. No Country For Old Men has the most basic plot, a protagonist who has come upon a case of stolen money and an antagonist who is looking for said case of money.

The basic plot makes way for a disturbing journey masterful filmmakers Joel and Ethan Coen aka Coen Brothers have become famous for taken their audience on. Based upon Cormac Mccormick’s searing novel, No Country For Old Men the film follows Llewellyn Moss, played to the bone by Josh Brolin, when he comes upon a Mexican drug trade that has gone terribly wrong. As he investigates, he finds a truckload of heroin and a survivor badly wounded and dying of thirst.

“Agua.” The badly wounded man begs.
“Ain’t got no water.” Llewellyn says dispassionately, removing the man’s AK-47 and the banana clip from his hand.

Eventually, Llewellyn happens upon two million dollars and understandably takes the money home. Hitman Anton Chigurh played psychotically by the Spanish actor Javier Bardem is looking to reclaim his money.

Unlike the not-so-scary Keyser Söze figure in the 1995 film The Usual Suspects that brought fear to the lips of the characters in the film who spoke of his name, Chigurh just brings unadulterated, papable fear. This is possibly one of the scariest renditions of a killer I’ve ever seen. The performance by Javier Bardem, aided and abetted by the Coen Brothers is a true accomplishment.

There is a dog chase scene in this film that is one of the most compelling that I’ve ever scene.

The hopelessness author Cormac Mccormick so often etches in his narrative prose bleeds onto the screen. What I appreciate about Mccormick as a writer is that he doesn’t fall so in love with his characters, they are susceptible to violence and death just as secondary characters are and the Coen Brothers are true to his voice as well as their own.

This film is bleak and often the despair is contagious as Sheriff Ed Tom Bell played with absolute perfection by Tommy Lee Jones, narrates as more of a witness than a participant. If Brolin and Bardem are the hare, Jones is surely the tortoise. Sheriff Bell is burnt out by the dystopic violence and is almost overshadowed by the other characters. Bell confides to his brother that he is outmatched as the dead bodies stack up.

This is one of the best films of the year.

No Country manages to be a western, thriller, horror film and action film and the last 20 minutes of the film will have you emotionally and physically exhausted and yet with all that personal investment there is no payoff, no comfort, no satisfaction and no resolution. The film will end, but it won’t leave you.

GRADE: A+

Friday, November 16, 2007

WHEN NIGHT IS FALLING


by Malik Isasis
























Like a fish that has been pulled from the ocean, we are witnessing the United States flapping about the deck gasping in the last moments of its superpower life. As we witness the collapse of the dollar in slow motion, it is only a symptom of the sun setting on the United States’ ability to project power and dominate world markets. Like the superpowers before it, the United States is going to find itself on the recycling heap of former superpowers.

On November 6th of 2000 Iraq became the first country to receive all of its oil export payments in euros instead of American dollars. This switch was estimated to cost Iraq $270 million dollars, but Iraq had since actually come out on top due to the rise in the value of the euro, which was actually probably influenced by Iraq’s decision to use the euro as its foreign exchange currency. At the time of the switch Iraq was selling over $60 million in crude oil a day so its easy to see that the change to the use of the euro could have a positive effect on the value of the euro.

Walking Dead

Since 1971 the world’s oil supply has been traded in U.S. dollars making the dollar the dominant reserve currency forcing countries who pay for energy and International Monetary Fund debt to use the dollar. Saddam Hussein was the first of the OPEC nations to start selling oil in euros, upsetting the U.S. monopoly. We all know what happened to Saddam. He became a casualty of ‘The War on Terror’. Syria, Iran has threatened to use euros as the reserve currency for buying oil. They are both being threatened by the United States and its proxy, Israel. Venezuela has threatened to use euros, and has even bartered around the dollar by trading with developing countries in energy for goods and services. As a result of President Chavez's disdain toward US policy, an attempt coup d’etat in 2002 by the Bush administration, failed.

"All of this is bad news for the US economy and the dollar. The fear for Washington will be that not only will the future price of oil not be right, but the currency might not be right either. Which perhaps helps explain why the US is increasingly turning to its second major tool for dominating world affairs: military force."

Bush has no sense of boundaries and will break the military by involving it in its attempt to occupy and subjugate the whole of the Middle East for the energy needs and the preservation of U.S. dominance.

Bush and his corporate pirates are acting like cornered cats lashing out, using all the blunt force of the government to maintain power over others. Power is only maintained because others are complicit to it. The world is no longer complicit to the United States and its discretions.

George Bush and his enablers have overplayed their hand. As we fall from grace and off the shelf of superpower, maybe it will humble us as it did European countries who’ve watched the sun set on their ability to project power, and now they are sitting back on the beach with Pena Colidas, enjoying the schadenfreude and the sun setting on America.

Wednesday, November 14, 2007

Of Dictators and Dramatists
A letter to General Musharraf


by Maliha Masood, Matrix Correspondent and Sheraz Malik






















Bravo Mr. President! Lajawaab Huzoor Alam! Another fine feather tossed in your green beret. You, dear sir, surely know how to make for one good drama. Keeping the audience on their toes. Building suspense. Going head to head against your protagonists. Doing battle as you see fit. Playing for all or nothing. Wah bhai wah! What an act, what a man. Has anyone ever told you that you might consider auditioning for the world’s greatest dramatist? Perhaps doing a one-man gig on Broadway next year? You’re bound to be a shoo in.

Think about it. Your illustrious name on the marquee in glowing neon. We’re no theater experts, but we advise you to come up with a catchy title, something along the lines of My life as Supreme Protector and Leader of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Now that would make for a stirring show if we do say so ourselves. We can just see the accolades piling up, the thundering applause, all the bells and whistles just because of you and only you, General Musharraf a.k.a Army Chief and Judiciary.

Allow us, dear sir, the honor of congratulating you on your recent victory, however rash it was. You could have waited and let things settle down a bit. But now that you’ve done the deed, we do so hope that you will not lead Pakistan into an even bigger stalemate than before. We think the country could use a break, given its topnotch reputation as social pariah, security hazard and all around schizophrenic. And we are understandably worried about the implications of your latest maneuver that some are calling your second coup d’etat. Why did you do it? More importantly, what it is to be expected?

By all accounts, your justification for restoring order and rescuing the nation from the brink of suicide is not very sound. Pakistan has been walking a tightrope ever since you decided to join forces with the U.S led war against terror. What choice did you have but to say yes, given the strategic crossroads Pakistan occupies on the world map, sharing borders with India, China, Afghanistan and Iran, not to mention the amenable port facilities along the Arabian Sea. If geography is destiny, then Pakistan’s troubles are far from being over. And you, dear Mr. Unelected President are right smack dab in the middle of it all.

Ever since the changing world order in the aftermath of 9/11, your fortunes rose from being a bit player in the international arena to a commander in chief catapulted into the limelight. You lapped up every moment of glory. Wooed by the foreign press, you appeared a consummate statesman in your immaculately ironed khaki duds and fielded questions with the panache of a seasoned pro. Perhaps you did not anticipate the extremist backlash that followed your concession to the Americans. You tightened the noose on democratic reform when you devolved power at the grassroots level by a system of centralized governance. The elected nazims or local district magistrates were at best Islamabad’s stooges to be told how and when to sing and dance. Only when the Islamist MMA party got itself elected in the North West Frontier Province, did you balk at the threat of Talibanization in Pakistan. But even then, you offered mere sound bites, scoffing at their “petty thinking” and did not break new ground.

It is noteworthy that your friends in Washington conspicuously stayed away from exercising any overt or covert pressure to put a damper on the religious zeal of MMA after the electoral victory in NWFP, probably because it is in the interest of the Americans to allow the mullahs to behead Pakistan to bolster ammunition for their campaigns against terror. This of course is nothing new and anyone who rebukes U.S. policy makers for supporting your dictatorial tactics, needs to go back and revisit world history textbooks, paying close attention to Latin America and South East Asia.

Now we do have some issues with your vacillations over religion and politics. On one hand, you goad the fanatics by giving into their demands. The lack of curbing politically oriented madrassahs is a case in point. The argument often made and consequently lost is that bringing the religiously right wing parties into the political mainstream will offset their extremist agendas. Many Muslim countries have taken this tack and failed. Given as you are a man of worldly tastes and means, you don’t have much tolerance for the sort of nonsense that was staged at the Red Mosque. You showed those hooligans you were not a man to mess with when the army stormed in to put an end to the siege. Well done, Mr. President. Strong leaders ought to be admired. It is good to take a stance and not dither around with indecisiveness. But you, dear sir, have taken your leadership role to a whole other level. And now that you’ve resumed your megalomaniacal post at center stage, we can only wonder what will happen next.

One small favor if you don’t mind. When and if you do make it out for your debut one-man show on Broadway, please bring us some jelabis. We really miss our jelabis. As a token of appreciation, we’ll offer you some of Seattle’s finest espresso. Or perhaps you prefer some good old fashioned chai like the kind we enjoy back home. Home. Now that rings a bell. We do hope there will be a home waiting for us in Pakistan. Not the kind of home that exists there now of security threats and bomb blasts and 24/7 mayhem. We’re not saying we couldn’t handle such a mess. We are, after all, Pakistani natives inured with a fine instinct for survival. Nothing really surprises us anymore. But we do like to brag now and then to our American friends about the Porsche dealership in Lahore and Karachi’s once thriving stock exchange. We’re also rather proud of our beautiful babe worthy supermodels that we have the privilege of seeing via satellite dish on GEO TV.

If you do only thing, Mr. President, we do so hope you will reinstate the independent media that has brought about a cultural renaissance of sorts that you’ve been fortunate enough to witness in your own lifetime. We must tell you how much we have enjoyed the shows on GEO and AJJ and ARY. They gave us many hours of entertainment, especially when we watched the Pakistani talk show, “Late Night Show With Begum Nawazish” hosted by that funny transvestite, Ali Saleem, who was rather fond of throwing a few punches at your Excellency. To tell you the truth, General Musharraf, we appreciated quite a few political satires. We couldn’t help comparing them as the Pakistani version of Jon Stewart’s show and those spoofs on Saturday Night Live.

Back then, you took it all in stride. It was so generous and so very accommodating a gesture for someone who likes to rule with a tight fist. Even more remarkable that in a conservative Muslim country, a transvestite was on national television taking cheap shots at the President (and you were OK with it). With such a liberal attitude toward Pakistani broadcasters, why have you suddenly turned the corner? It does not sit down well with those who are unaware of your former support of a free and independent media (and there are sadly many folks who are clueless about the positive aspects of Pakistan given your lackluster PR job). You, dear sir, are most certainly not helping. Many of our friends in America say that you are the Pakistani problem personified. Whether the country will be better off without your esteemed presence is yet to be determined.

The options are not so inspiring. It is common knowledge that you are not the biggest fan of Benazir Bhutto. Neither are we. But there is something to be said for making a plea bargain. And now that you have put yourself in a fine old pickle, dear sir, we advise you to consider the alternatives. Of course, being the ruling king of drama, you are not likely to step off the stage so easily. But think of past predicaments when General Jehangir Karamat was forced to resign from the army after getting too big for his breaches and we don’t mean that strictly as a metaphor.

Surely, General Musharraf, you don’t want to get into a tussle with the very group from where you derive all your support. And if you really want us to recall ghosts from the past, then think of the sad fate of our country’s long departed Prime Minister, Zulfikhar Ali Bhutto, Benazir’s once dashing father who was hung in a Rawalpindi jail on the orders of General Zia. He too was a military man and like you, he did a marvelous acting job as dictator/dramatist in backing America’s proxy war during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the mid 1980’s.

Good old Zia. Do you remember his famous retort to Carter when offered one million dollars to fight the communists next door? It is only peanuts, he had said with a glint in his bold black eyes. Now we know for a fact that you are receiving more than just a handful of peanuts from Washington to thwart off terrorism and Al-Qaeda factions and all those ill-mannered louts and Pathans with their love of guns and drugs who came as refugees to roost in our troubled land in the wake of the Afghan mess. How convenient that the Americans never bothered to clean it up. Rightly so, it is rather unfair to take up the burden of solving a problem not entirely of your own making. But this, we are afraid, is an occupational hazard that all leaders have to contend with, whether they run corporations or countries, and like it or not, Mr. President/CEO, you’re stuck with the job you so badly wanted.

Now we won’t get too bogged down with Zia and his legacy in this short letter, but let us just remind you, General M, that General Z did not live to see the full harvest of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. So what’s your ultimate agenda, dear Mr. President and chief law giver? Do you want to take this scarred nation down the road of further disrepair? Do you want to patch up the country’s wounds with more scotch tape policies and hope it all stays together for a few more weeks or months? Do you want to keep on alienating friends and enemies alike until you’re standing alone, all alone, facing only your own reflection? What will you govern, dear Mr. President, when Pakistan is no longer willing or left to be governed?

We know you like living life on the edge. All dictators and dramatists do. That is why they are always up to something, creating havoc in their countries. But surely there are better ways to live and to rule. Maybe you can be more creative and reverse the trend of Pakistan’s militarism. Take the country to new heights of fame. Tap into the potential of the burgeoning civil society, all those talented, educated and progressive men and women who want to see the nation succeed and prosper. Of course, you will get due credit for what you sow. And if you just think for a moment about the inscription on your tombstone, would you prefer Autocratic Dictator to Champion Maverick?

The choice is yours. We only hope that you’ll make a wise one.



Maliha Masood is an award-winning writer and the author of Zaatar Days, Henna Nights. A former policy analyst at the International Crisis Group in Islamabad, she is the founder and president of The Diwaan Project, a Seattle-based cultural institute geared toward public education on global affairs. Maliha teaches a course on women and Islam at the University of Washington and is currently at work on her first novel set in contemporary Pakistan.

Sheraz Malik is a business consultant, social activist and a political analyst who has a deep insight into national and international policy issues concerning South Asia. He is also northwest Bureau Chief for GEO TV and a cultural ambassador for “Safeer-e-Pakistan”, an organization of expatriate Pakistanis living in the U.S.

Friday, November 09, 2007

SEX & TABOOS IN THE ISLAMIC WORLD



by Amira El Ahl and Daniel Steinvorth
Spiegel International






Sex is a taboo in conservative Islamic countries. Young, unmarried couples are forced to seek out secret erotic oases. Books and plays that are devoted to the all too human topic of sex incur the wrath of conservative religious officials and are promptly banned.

Rabat, Morocco. Every evening Amal the octopus vendor looks on as sin returns to his beach. It arrives in the form of handholding couples who hide behind the tall, castle-like quay walls in the city's harbor district to steal a few clandestine kisses. Some perform balancing acts on slippery rocks and seaweed to secure a spot close to the Atlantic Ocean and cuddle in the dim evening light. The air tastes of salt and hashish. On some mornings, when Amal finds used condoms on the beach, he wishes that these depraved, shameless sinners -- who aren't even married, he says -- would roast in hell.
Cairo, Egypt. A hidden little dead-end street in Samalik, a posh residential neighborhood, with a view of the Nile. Those who live here can stand on their balconies at night and see things that no one is meant to see. The cars begin arriving well before sunset, some evenings bringing as many as a hundred amorous couples. Almost all the girls wear headscarves, but that doesn't prevent them from wearing skin-tight, long-sleeved tops. The boys are like boys everywhere, nonchalantly placing their arms around their girlfriends' shoulders and even more nonchalantly sliding their hands into their blouses.

The locals call this place "Shari al-Hubb," or "Street of Love." The gossips say that children have been conceived here and couples have been spotted engaging in oral sex.

Beirut, Lebanon. As techno music blares from the loudspeakers in the dim light, patrons shout their drink orders across the bar. Boys in tight jeans and unbuttoned, white shirts, their hair perfectly styled, jostle their way onto the dance floor. The men shake their hips, clap their hands and embrace -- but without touching all too obviously. After all, those who go too far could end up being thrown out of "Acid," Beirut's most popular gay disco. Officially, "Acid" is nothing more than a nightclub in an out-of-the-way industrial neighborhood.

As liberal as Lebanon is, flaunting one's homosexuality is verboten. Gays are tolerated, but only as long as they remain under the radar and conceal their activities from public scrutiny.

For many in the Arab world, discretion is the only option when it comes to experiencing lust and passion. There are secret spots everywhere, and they are often the only place to go for those forced to live with the contradictions of the modern Islamic world. In countries whose governments are increasingly touting strict morals and chastity, prohibitions have been unsuccessful at suppressing everyday sexuality. Religious censors are desperately trying to put a stop to what they view as declining morals in their countries, but there is little they can do to stop satellite TV, the Internet and text messaging.

A counterforce to Western excesses?

Do the stealthy violations of taboos and moral precepts foreshadow a sexual revolution in the Arab world? Or is the pressure being applied by the moralists creating a new prudishness, a counterforce to the perceived excesses of the West?

For now, everything seems possible, including the idea that a man can end up spending a night in jail for being caught with a condom in his shirt pocket. Ali al-Gundi, an Egyptian journalist, was driving his girlfriend home when he was stopped at a police checkpoint. He didn't have his driver's license with him, but it was 4 a.m. and he was in the company of an attractive woman. For the police, this was reason enough to handcuff Gundi and his girlfriend and take them to the police station. "On the way there, they threatened to beat us," says the 30-year-old. At the station, they took away his mobile phone and wallet and found an unused condom in his shirt pocket.
"They were already convinced that my girlfriend was a whore," says Gundi. The couple ended up behind bars, even after telling the police that they planned to get married in a few months. Only after the woman notified her father the next day were the two released from jail. For Gundi, one thing is certain: "If the officer who stopped us hadn't been so sexually frustrated, he would have let us go."

The sexual frustration of many young Arabs has countless causes, most of them economic. Jobs are scarce and low-paying, and most young men are unable to afford and furnish their own apartments -- a prerequisite to being able to marry in most Arab countries. At the same time, premarital sex is an absolute taboo in Islam. As a result, cities across the Arab world -- Algiers, Alexandria, Sana'a and Damascus -- are filled with "boy-men" between 18 and 35 who are forced to live with their parents for the foreseeable future.

There is one exception, and it's even sanctioned by the Islamic faith: the "temporary marriage" or "pleasure marriage" -- not a bond for life but one designed for intimate sins. Such agreements, presided over by imams, are not regulated by the state. They can be concluded for only a few hours or they can be open-ended. But particularly romantic they are not.

Separating the sexes

Another frustrating development for young Islamic men is the growing separation of the sexes. More and more women are wearing modest clothing. Some choose to wear headscarves or cover their entire bodies, and some even wear black gloves to cover the last remaining bit of exposed skin on their bodies.

Nowadays a woman walking along a Cairo street without a veil stands a good chance of being stared at as if she were from another planet. Journalist Gundi is convinced that "oppression brings out perversion in people." The men want their women to be covered and veiled because they are afraid of women -- "afraid of the feelings women provoke."
Most Egyptian women now wear a headscarf, but for varying reasons. Ula Shahba, 27, sees the trend toward covering one's head as an expression of a new female self-confidence, not as a symbol of oppression. For the past two years, Shahba has worn the headscarf voluntarily -- out of conviction, as she emphasizes, insisting that no one forces her to do so. But, she adds, the decision wasn't easy. "I love my hair," she says, "but it shouldn't be visible to everyone." Shahba doesn't believe that the headscarf is a sign of religious devoutness. "It's more of a trend," she says.

A Moroccan study published in early 2006 in L'Economiste, a Moroccan business publication, shows how paradoxical young Arabs' attitudes toward religion and sexuality can be. According to the study, young Muslims in the Maghreb region are increasingly ignoring the clearly defined rules of their religion. Premarital sex is not unusual, and 56 percent of young men admit to watching porn on a regular basis. But the respondents also said that it was just as important to them to pray, observe the one-month Ramadan fast and marry a fellow Muslim. When seen in this light, young Muslims' approach to Islam seems as hedonistic as it is variable, almost arbitrary.

Betraying the message of Muhammad

Muslim novelist "Nedjma" ("Star"), the author of "The Almond," a successful erotic novel, describes Moroccan society as divided and bigoted. Despite progressive family and marriage laws, she says, the country is still controlled by patriarchal traditions in which men continue to sleep around and treat women as subordinates. It is a society in which prudishness and sexual obsession, ignorance and desire, "sperm and prayer" coexist. "The more repressive a society is, the more desperately it seeks an outlet," says Nedjma, who conceals her real name because she has already been vilified on the Internet as a "whore" and an "insult to Islam."

Men like Samir, 36, a bald waiter who wears a formal, black and white uniform to work, could be straight out of Nedjma's novel. Samir grins at the prospect of catching a glimpse of unveiled girls in his café in Rabat. But in the same breath, he admits that he would never spend a significant amount of time in the same room with a woman he doesn't know. "No man and no woman can be together without being accompanied by the devil," he believes, adding that he is quoting the Prophet Muhammad.

But most sources paint a completely different picture of the religious leader, describing him as a hedonist and womanizer who loved and worshipped women. Indeed, he married 12 women, including a businesswoman 15 years his senior, to whom he remained faithful until her death. Author Nedjma says that Muslim men today are "betraying the message of Muhammad," whom she describes as a delicate, gallant man. She doubts that the prophet was afraid of female sexuality, as many of the men in her social circle are today.

Even conservative theologians emphasize the compatibility of pleasure and faith -- but only after marriage. They can even evoke the Prophet Mohammed, who said: "In this world, I loved women, pleasant scents and prayer."

This presents an odd contradiction to the puritanical present, which represents a fundamental departure from Islam's more open-minded past and has instead made way for a humorless and rigorous Islamism.

Journalist Ali al-Gundi believes that Muslim men have a troubled relationship with their own sexuality. "Most men only want to marry a virgin," he says. "What for? Isn't it much nicer to be with a partner who has experience?" Gundi talks about his girlfriends who have done everything but actually have sex, so as not to damage their hymens. That would mean social death.

Egyptian filmmaker Ahmed Khalid devoted his first short film, "The Fifth Pound," to the topic of taboo. The film tells the story of a young couple who use a bus ride to be together and exchange more than just a few innocent, tender words. Every Friday morning, when everyone else is at the mosque for prayers, they meet on the third-to-the-last bench on the bus, a spot where none of the other passengers can see what they are doing. As they sit there, shoulder-to-shoulder, staring straight ahead, they stroke each other's bodies. Their only fear is that the bus driver will see what they are doing through the rear view mirror. He watches the couple, fully aware of what they are doing, all the while indulging in his own fantasies.

In his imagination, the driver sits down next to the girl, carefully removes her headscarf and unbuttons her blouse. She closes her eyes and presses her fingers into the armrest. The headscarf slowly slides off the seat. Both reach climax, the girl in the bus driver's fantasy and the boy through his girlfriend's hand. In the end, the couple pays the driver four pounds for the tickets and a fifth for his silence.

Of course, Khalid was unable to find a distributor for his scandalous, 14-minute short film, and even Cairo's liberal cultural centers refused to run "The Fifth Pound" without it being censored first. Even though, or perhaps precisely because the film does not depict any actual sexual activity, it excites the viewer's fantasy -- an especially odious offense in the eyes of religious censors.

The Internet is a refuge for hidden desires, even though it offers only virtual relief. Google Trends, a new service offered by the search engine, provides a way to demonstrate how difficult it is to banish forbidden yearnings from the heads of Muslims. By entering the term "sex" into Google Trends, one obtains a ranked list of cities, countries and languages in which the term was entered most frequently. According to Google Trends, the Pakistanis search for "sex" most often, followed by the Egyptians. Iran and Morocco are in fourth and fifth, Indonesia is in seventh and Saudi Arabia in eighth place. The top city for "sex" searches is Cairo. When the terms "boy sex" or "man boy sex" are entered (many Internet filters catch the word "gay"), Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Egypt are the first four countries listed.

Homosexuality is more than just a taboo in the Islamic world. In fact it is considered a crime, punishable by imprisonment or even the death penalty.

Yusuf al-Qaradawi, an imam who lives in Qatar and has a television show on Arab network Al Jazeera, considers homosexuality as an especially decadent monster created by the West. It is against the "divine order," says the religious scholar, citing verses in the Koran that describe homosexuality as a common practice in pre-Islamic Arabia.

Homosexuals are referred to in Arabic as "Luti," or people from the city of the Lut, which is mentioned in the Koran and the Bible and is described as having been destroyed by God's wrath. The sources seem to clearly support this notion.

As a result, very few gay Muslims even attempt to reconcile their faith with their sexual orientation. Most, says George Assi, a spokesman of Helem, the only gay and lesbian organization in the Arab world, are in despair over the fact that they cannot be as virtuous as their religion prescribes.

Helem, a Lebanese organization that is neither completely legal nor prohibited, has its office in an Islamic business district in Beirut, a city that offers greater political and sexual freedom than any other place in the Arab world. But even here the organization faces protests and threatening phone calls, especially from the Gulf states. "Many talk about us as if we were sick people who must either be healed or abandoned," says Assi.

"Shocking, sad" stories

Unlike Lebanon, Egypt is a place where freedom of opinion is always in jeopardy. The country's once-blossoming worlds of art and literature are especially affected. This makes it all the more astonishing that a play could be produced on a Cairo stage that deals exclusively with sex. Even the play's title, "Bussy," is a provocation. It resembles the English word "pussy," but it is also a slang term Egyptian men use to tell a woman to "look here."

And this is precisely what the directors wanted: to attract attention -- to discrimination, lack of respect and mental immaturity. "We had no intention of being daring or of provoking anyone. We merely wanted to tell the truth," says director Naas Chan. The performance was created as an analogue to the famous New York play, "The Vagina Monologues." When the American production was performed at the American University in Cairo, it was met with disgust, indignation and -- enthusiastic applause. But because it had little to do with the problems of Egyptian women, a group of students decided to stage a sort of "Islamic Vagina Monologue" with amateur actors.

Ordinary women were asked to talk about love and sex. "Their stories were so shocking, so touching, sad and amusing that they needed no editing," says Chan. And that was how "Bussy" was created.

In one scene, a girl, her voice choking with tears, talks about the day her mother took her to the doctor, without telling her that he was going to circumcise her. "When I woke up I felt the pain. Something was missing ... the flesh that they had stolen belonged to me!" Another woman describes her experience with an imam who, when she was 10, forced her into a closet and raped her. "When I told my mother about it, she said that I was making it up."

"I was surprised that almost all the stories we got were serious," says director Chan. The women talked about their experiences with abortions, rapes, female circumcision and plain, everyday discrimination. Each of the 50 stories submitted reflects a slice of Egyptian reality. Telling the stories required a great deal of courage, says Chan. The mere knowledge that one's own story will be performed in front of an audience represents a break with tradition. Sexual abuse, says Chan, is considered a family matter, and if it is disclosed to outsiders, the family feels dishonored and believes the woman has been deprived of her value.

Abir embodies yet another archetype in Arab-Islamic moral society. She is 32 years old, petite, dark-skinned and wears an expensive, long black wig. She lives alone in a small but tidy apartment. Images from the days of the Pharaohs hang on her walls next to large, white pencils -- souvenirs from a trip to Germany's Rügen Island. Abir sits on a white wooden couch with pink upholstery. She wears shorts and a pink T-shirt. A tattoo of the sun adorns her right upper arm and she has a nicotine patch stuck to her left arm.

Abir married for the first time when she was 23. Her mother was dead, her father bedridden and she had been making a meager living as a maid. The marriage was a nightmare. Her husband beat her, and on one occasion her mother-in-law cut off her long black hair and hung it on the wall -- as a warning. Abir obtained a divorce and took a job in a bar, where she met wealthy foreigners.

Abir spreads out a series of photos on her coffee table. They show two happy people, swimming in the ocean, sitting on a park bench, shopping in Germany. But when the man in the photograph, a German named Ingo, still didn't want to marry her after three years, Abir broke off the relationship -- on the phone.

"Why should I waste my life?" she asks.

She also has photos of her and Luis, an American, with whom she had a relationship for a year. Luis wanted to take her home to the United States. "A wonderful man, he spoiled me," she says. But then they had a falling out and Luis left without her. He married another woman and Abir was beside herself. By the time she had come to her senses, she had lost her job as a waitress and decided to do what she had done in the past. She sold her body.
"Egyptians pay 200 pounds (about €28), and Saudis pay 1,000 pounds or sometimes even more," says Abir. "Foreigners pay me $200. Condoms are required." She shows us the results of her most recent AIDS test, which was negative. Without the test she would not have been granted a German visa. Today she is afraid of being alone, says prostitute Abir. Almost all of her siblings are married.

"The police give you a hard time, sometimes for no reason at all. It's enough for them to see an unmarried woman sitting alone in a bar." Prison terms and beatings are the minimum. If a couple is caught in the act, the woman is the one who suffers.

Abir wants to get married as soon as possible. She says that she has just met another American. She wants to take him to the mosque. As a Muslim woman, she can only marry a Muslim man. And she says the American is going to convert soon and learn more about her religion.

When that happens, she says, the first thing she will do is get out of Egypt.

Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan

Wednesday, November 07, 2007

A LETTER FROM KARACHI
Bomb Blasts and Stock Quotes



by Maliha Masood, Matrix Correspondent






















Picture this: A vibrant private sector creating jobs and improving productivity. A stock exchange index that has been rated as the world's best performing emerging market. A $500 million Eurobond issued to reclaim investor confidence. A geo-strategic port on the shores of the Arabian Sea.

Now picture this: Mullahs with big beards. Teenagers with Kalashnikovs. Cross border insurgencies. Clashes between the army and civil society. Death threats and blood baths perpetuating a vicious cycle of political unrest.

To call it schizophrenic would be an understatement. Then again, what can you say about a place that vacillates between extremes, showcasing two very different sides seemingly at odds with each other. Both are valid. But Pakistan's economic growth story is largely muffled out by global security concerns and perceptions of wide spread instability. Therein lies the Pakistani Achilles heel plaguing investors and policy makers. Positive factors undermined by negatives. It's not a syndrome unique to Pakistan, but so problematic is Pakistan's image abroad, that one would be hard pressed to reconcile how a country manufacturing bomb blasts has also been home to one of Asia's healthiest stock markets.

Of course, stock quotes were the furthest thing on my mind last week as I watched news headlines erupting across the internet and listened to anchor men and women announcing the assassination attempt on Pakistan's returning ex-Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. Opinions at the family dinner table hovered around the history repeats itself, same old saga triteness. What can you expect from a savage country was the consensus of my father, who has more or less given up on contemporary Pakistan, a galaxy removed from what he knew and loved about the country. It was different for me when I went back to Karachi in the summer of 2004, after 21 years of being away from my birthplace. Let's just say that I went prepared to see some changes. But not the kind I was expecting.

For one thing, I was not expecting my first acquaintance in Pakistan to be a drop dead gorgeous executive banker whose acquaintances were mostly other posh bankers and analysts at Merrill Lynch. As we all got better acquainted, I learned about the bullish Karachi Stock Exchange (KSE) and how domestic liquidity was pouring into the market with divided yields in the 8 to 12 per cent range. Pakistan's burgeoning middle class was getting a taste of banking services and revolving credit facilities unheard of before, facilitating auto loans and other forms of consumer financing. Then there was talk of Norway's Telenor Mobile Communications being awarded a license for nearly $300 million to develop Pakistan's thriving telecom sector. At the same time, across the North West Frontier Province, the local government, dominated by the MMA Party, comprising a hodepodge of the disgruntled and religiously conservative, backed a new bill to introduce a stringent interpretation of Islamic laws. The bill prompted worries about the arrival of Talibanization in Pakistan and the viability of General Musharraf's policies in combatting the unruliness in the Tribal Areas.

Meanwhile, in Islamabad the country's Finance Minister, Shaukat Aziz repeatedly admonished the government to attract more foreign direct investment, as well as reduce the cost of doing business and the amount of red tape involved. To do so amidst encroaching extremist tendencies legitimizing Pakistan's pariah state reputation was no easy matter. My banker friends were convinced that only when people come to Pakistan do they get a huge change in perception that throws out the cliches of bearded fundamentalists in favor of smooth shaven, pin-striped suited financial wizards a la Wall Street walking a mile a minute in the gritty roadways of Karachi, and saying things you don’t hear on CNN.

Banker 1:
We are experiencing the best macroeconomic climate the country has ever seen.

Banker 2:
And we don't need the IMF when market discipline is keeping us on track.

Banker 1:
If only the investors would come and check this place out!

Banker 2:
Come on yaar! Don’t be such an idealist nincompoop. Why on earth would anyone come? Look at what we’re exporting abroad in our good name. Who gives a damn about the market when they’re worried about some fundo blowing off their brains?

Banker 1:
The market does not care about fundos.

Banker 2:
But the investors care. And without investors, there is no market to speak off. We need more privatization, surplas capital. Our foreign reserves are shamelessly low. And guess who’s to blame?

Banker 1:
You do have a point. So what’s the solution?

Banker 2:
It’s a fine balance. National security=economic sovereignty=impregnable defense=smooth political process.

Banker 1:
Dream on.

And so last night, Banker 2 had a dream. The ticker tape in Karachi was going bonkers, spewing all sorts of gibberish. It went like this.

Indeed so. Indeed so. Do come on over and see it for yourself. No wait. Please. Not now. Don't come now. It is too dangerous. You will be confused and frustrated. And also thrilled and surprised. There is a lot to discover here. We have our messes just like any other country. But we also have Opportunities. Now you should be the first to value that, coming as you do from the land of the great big O. It's all a waiting game for now. To find out the winners and losers. A bit of a joke really. But you have to play the game even if you don't know the rules. Now don't be afraid now. We'll take good care of you. Oh yes, we will. V.I.P treatment from the moment you arrive. What's that? Of course. Of course. We will cater to your every wish. We are known for our hospitable ways. Most of us anyway. OK, the very best of us then. And you are, after all, an honored guest who has come from such a faraway place. All because, how to say, of your inquiring nature? It is good to be this way. Good because we have no answers. Only we know how to ask many questions. And if you really want to know what this country is like, then you will have to make a visit. As for why and when, that is entirely up to you. But please, think something of this. Whether it was the chicken or the egg does not really matter in the end. Same same for us. Our politics and our markets live together. We cannot promise 100% safety. But it is not in our opinion a risk free business, what you call life. So we hope that you do come and see us. We will give you big Pakistani welcome. OK? With love and salaam, from KSE.

Maliha Masood was born in Karachi, Pakistan. She spent her childhood as a South Asian chameleon, strongly influenced by her mother's native Bombay, her father's South Indian heritage, a library of Enid Blyton books, and a Parsi all-girls school. Click here for her book Zataar Days, Henna Nights.

Sunday, November 04, 2007

PAKISTAN - KEY QUESTIONS


by David Blair, Telegraph



















Why has President Pervez Musharraf suspended the constitution?

Because Pakistan's Supreme Court was about to declare his rule illegal. Last month, Gen Musharraf was re-elected as president by Pakistan's National Assembly and the provincial legislatures. But this happened while he was still commander of the army. Under the constitution, no one can combine the offices of president and army chief. Although Gen Musharraf had promised to resign as head of the army by Nov 15, the Supreme Court was on the point of declaring his re-election illegal.

What has Gen Musharraf gained by imposing emergency rule?

The power to sack the Supreme Court judges who were on the verge of ruling against him. Gen Musharraf has already dismissed the Chief Justice, Iftikhar Chaudhry. He will now clear out the Supreme Court and appoint a new bench of judges in the hope that they will legalise his rule. If the justices oblige, Gen Musharraf might end the state of emergency quite soon.

What about the forthcoming elections?

In theory, Pakistan must hold parliamentary elections by January. Now that the constitution has been suspended, everything has been thrown into doubt. If the period of emergency rule is brief, the polls may still happen though not for at least a year.

What has been the reaction inside Pakistan?

Gen Musharraf has moved quickly against his opponents, carrying out hundreds of pre-emptive arrests. Independent television channels have been shut down. Although newspapers are still publishing, they face tight controls. Gen Musharraf is clearly trying to head off any popular unrest.

Will this succeed?

The key question is whether the two largest opposition movements will call mass protests against emergency rule. These are Benazir Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party (PPP) and the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), a coalition of six fundamentalist parties. Ms Bhutto was on the verge of concluding a power-sharing deal with Gen Musharraf. She has not been placed under arrest yet. Although she has condemned emergency rule, she has so far refrained from calling her supporters on to the streets. Presumably Ms Bhutto still hopes to share power with Gen Musharraf. As for the MMA, they have also failed to call any protests, perhaps hoping for some reward from the regime.

Is this good news for Gen Musharraf?

Yes. As long as the PPP and the MMA are both neutralised, there is unlikely to be a general uprising on a scale that could threaten his grip on power.

What about the Islamist militants?

They have grown bolder in recent months, spreading from their strongholds in the anarchic tribal areas lining the frontier with Afghanistan and moving deeper into Pakistan. Most recently, militants have taken over enclaves of the Swat Valley, once a tourist attraction. They will use the imposition of emergency rule as a rallying cry against Gen Musharraf. This will be of great concern to Britain and America, who view Pakistan as the linchpin of the war on terrorism.

What about the army?

This is the most crucial question of all. If Gen Musharraf retains the army's loyalty, he can get away with almost anything. He will almost certainly break his promise to resign as army chief. But if emergency rule drags on and fails to quell the unrest, the army may also become restive. Gen Ashfaq Pervez Kiyani, the army's deputy commander, is a pivotal figure. If anyone decides to lead a coup against Gen Musharraf, it will be him.