Musharraf's moves a step back for democracy in Pakistan

TAYLOR HAIGLER ?08

On November 3, General Pervez Musharraf, president of Pakistan, imposed statewide emergency rule. He explained it as a necessary move in the fight against terrorism. Musharraf suspended the constitution; ordered Pakistani police to patrol the streets of the capitol, Islamabad; censored the media; and ordered the arrests of over a thousand people, among them human rights activists, political oppositionists, lawyers, independent news reporters and even teachers.

Musharraf, in addition to being the president of Pakistan, was also the army?s Chief of Staff. He had promised to relinquish his ties to the military before November 15, when he was expected to take oath of office for a third five-year term. Under the constitution, Musharraf couldn?t run for another term while serving both as president and as a military leader. In an interview three months ago, General Musharraf said that his army uniform was his second skin: ?How can I possibly take it off?? Some speculate that the declaration of emergency is tied to rumors that the court was planning to rule against Musharraf. More recently, Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry reported that the Supreme Court believed that Musharraf had no power to suspend the constitution

Musharraf has dismissed several independent-minded judges, including Chaudhry, from the Supreme Court. Musharraf told the Associated Press last week that he expected the new court to quickly endorse his re-election, and he was right. Last Wednesday, Attorney General Malik Mohammed Qayyum said that Musharraf would quit his army post and be sworn in for a third term.

Government officials have reiterated that the declaration of emergency was necessary in the country?s fight against terrorism and that it would not derail Pakistan?s progress toward democracy. The chief election commissioner has confirmed that parliamentary and provincial assembly elections will be held on January 8, 2008. ?[Musharraf] has vowed to ?do his utmost? to end emergency rule before elections in January,? says United Kingdom Prime Minister Gordon Brown.

Benazir Bhutto, the former Pakistani prime minister who favors democratic rule in Pakistan and who had hoped to be reelected in January, strongly opposes Musharraf?s recent course of action. She led hundreds of people in a demonstration outside Parliament on November 7. At a news conference, Bhutto encouraged the people of Pakistan to join the movement against Musharraf?s emergency rule. Since then, Bhutto has been placed under house arrest and authorities have barricaded her street.

Bhutto has urged western governments to pressure Musharraf to discontinue what Bhutto calls a ?military dictatorship.? The United States, Britain, France and other concerned nations have responded and are urging Musharraf to lift the emergency declaration and return to a constitutional government.

During a phone conversation with Musharraf, President George Bush said, ?The United States wants you to have the elections as scheduled, and I want you to take the uniform off.? The United States is Pakistan?s most important ally and the U.S. has not yet taken steps beyond criticizing Musharraf because anything more might disrupt the partnership with Pakistan in fighting Al Qaeda.

The United States is not the only ally whose support Pakistan stands to lose. French President Nicolas Sarkozy, in agreement with the United States, also expressed his concern to Musharraf about the state of emergency. The Netherlands has put economic sanctions in place, freezing millions of dollars in financial aid that they had agreed to give to Pakistan. Britain has said that they are reviewing their aid to Pakistan and may withdraw their support if Musharraf continues to impose martial law. Also, the 53-nation Commonwealth suspended Pakistan from its group, calling the situation in Pakistan ?a serious violation of the Commonwealth?s fundamental political values.? This decision is an embarrassment but it does not carry any economic sanctions.

In recent days Musharraf's regime has released more than 3,400 people who had been detained. In addition to stepping down from his army post, Musharraf has promised that elections will be held in January. Perhaps most importantly, he has promised to end emergency rule on December 16. Musharraf?s recent actions demonstrate that he is listening and responding to the Pakistani people and the international community. One can only hope that from here on, Musharraf can redeem himself and lead Pakistan toward democracy.

Sources and Further Reading:
US Aims to Restructure Aid to Pakistan (New York Times)
World reconsiders Pakistan aid (CNN)
Pakistan under martial law (CNN)
Read more!

Facebook, now valued at $15 billion, poised to launch new ad network

TOPH TUCKER ?08

On October 24, after months of speculation, the AP reported that Microsoft had landed a deal to buy 1.6% percent of social networking giant Facebook for $240 million. The deal values Facebook at $15 billion, and it gives Microsoft worldwide advertising rights.

Google, who had also been in the running for the deal, responded on the 30th with a new initiative called OpenSocial. OpenSocial aims to let developers easily build applications for a wide range of social networking sites, including MySpace, Friendster, Oracle, Orkut, and more.

While that deal was heralded as a great coup for Google, Facebook now seems ready to fight back themselves. ?SocialAds? aims to finally provide Facebook with a solid source of revenue by using user profiles to target ads to customers. The Facebook Flyers program already does this to some extent within Facebook, but the new program would include ads on other web sites as well.

Another Facebook initiative would integrate third-party site data into your News Feed. A partner, such as Amazon.com, might give you the option to add ?[User] bought [item] at Amazon.com? to your feed.

For more information, see the editorial ?Why Facebook will rule the world?and why it won?t.?

------------
Image from: www.digital-lifestyles.info


Read more!

President of Iran Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speaks at Columbia; mixed reaction in U.S. and Iran

TAYLOR HAIGLER '08

?Hate-mongering vitriol,? ?Hitler of Iran? and ?Madman Iran Prez? are just a few of the names that have appeared in the news lately referring to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the President of Iran. He has become one of the most troublesome and noteworthy leaders in the world. Last year, Time magazine described him as ?a president unlike any other Iran has known: belligerent, na�ve?and a dark genius at mobilizing Iranian public opinion.?

Throughout his political career, Ahmadinejad has been widely criticized for his anti-semitic remarks, having previously referred to the Holocaust as a myth and called for the destruction of Israel. He speaks critically of the United States government, calling it an ?arrogant power? that has no right to try and limit Iran?s industrial and technological development. Ahmadinejad has continued Iran?s uranium-enrichment program despite countless demands from the United Nations Security Council to stop developing nuclear capabilities. Ahmadinejad has also become increasingly unpopular at home for spending too much time criticizing the West and not enough time reforming the nation?s stagnant economy.

Recently, Ahmadinejad has been under severe scrutiny because of the controversy surrounding his last trip to the United States. The Iranian President came to New York City to speak at the United Nations General Assembly and was invited to address the students at Columbia University as part of the school?s World Leaders series.

In response, the nation erupted in protest over Ahmadinejad?s invitation to speak. Given the inflammatory nature of his position on Israel, the West and his support of terrorist activities, many were incensed that Columbia would give Ahmadinejad a forum to express his views. Christine Quinn, speaker of the New York City Council said, ?All he will do on that stage is spew more hatred and more venom out there to the world.? Others supported Columbia?s decision of allowing Ahmadinejad to speak insisting that institutions of higher learning must value academic freedom and have an obligation to share differing opinions.

Despite the vociferous opposition, Ahmadinejad addressed an auditorium of students and faculty on September 18th. In his introduction, Columbia President, Lee Bollinger, addressed the concerns that the protesters put forth and reiterated that Columbia in no way supports Ahmadinejad?s actions or beliefs. Bollinger spoke of Ahmadinejad?s alleged support of Iraqi insurgents targeting U.S. troops, his government?s nuclear ambitions and his remarks about Israel. He concluded his introduction with, ?And today I feel all the weight of the modern civilized world yearning to express the revulsion at what you stand for. I only wish I could do better.? American rhetoric ironically runs the risk of solidifying Ahmadinejad?s shaky support at home. Many considered Bollinger?s introduction patronizing and inhospitable as he referred to Ahmadinejad as a ?petty and cruel dictator.? Ahmadinejad responded, ?In Iran, tradition requires when you invite a person to be a speaker, we actually respect our students enough to allow them to make their own judgment, and don?t think it?s necessary before the speech is even given to come in with a series of complaints to provide vaccination to the students and faculty.? In this exchange he came off as the victim, getting the better of Bollinger.

Throughout the question and answer session, Ahmadinejad carefully dodged the answers to many pointed questions that the students had submitted. However, when the moderator asked why Iran executed gays, he declared, ?In Iran, we don't have homosexuals, like in your country. We don't have that in our country. In Iran, we do not have this phenomenon. I don't know who's told you that we have it.? His refusal to directly answer any of the other questions that students posed made a sham of what could have been a truly intellectual debate.

Image from:
http://www.iranchamber.com/history/mahmadinejad/images/mahmoud_ahmadinejad1.jpg

Read more!

American mercenary group's killings spark outrage in Iraq

TOPH TUCKER '08

On September 16, at least 11 Iraqis were killed, not by terrorists, not by Iraqi security, not by the American military, but by Blackwater USA?a private security company used to protect State Department officials and other diplomats abroad.

The story, according to reports, goes something like this: a Blackwater Private Security Detail was escorting a State Department convoy to a meeting. Somewhere around Nasoor Square in Baghdad, Blackwater may or may not have opened fire on a slow-moving car that failed to get out of the way. An explosive device or mortar may or may not have exploded near the convoy. The vehicles may or may not have been attacked with small-arms fire. As the situation escalated, a Blackwater helicopter may or may not have opened fire from the air.

While Blackwater claims they weren?t attacking civilians, evidence states otherwise. Outrage followed the incident, and Iraqi officials attempted to ban Blackwater from the country, but relented in the face of US pressure. (Since Paul Bremer passed ?Order 17? on June 27, 2004, Blackwater and other American-associated forces have been immune from Iraqi law, but the policy is now under scrutiny.) The Blackwater probe has since expanded to five incidents in which the firm allegedly killed Iraqi civilians.

Many officials are accusing Blackwater guards of tending to overreact. Iraqis, certainly, have long resented their presence. Just this weekend, the State Department announced new restrictions that will try to curtail this sort of incident. The State Department, though, may not have the resources to fully protect itself without hiring contractors like Blackwater. Nevertheless, the latest word is that use of private security contractors may soon be phased out.

The news from Iraq isn?t all bad, however. The AP reports that American and civilian deaths last month hit their lowest point in over a year, the latest indication that June?s surge may actually be working. This most recent Blackwater incident, though, just makes it clearer than ever that the situation in Iraq is far from reaching any sort of resolution.

Image from:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/42487

Further Reading:

Blackwater probe expands to 5 deadly incidents
Blackwater USA
Death From All Sides
Deaths among U.S. forces, Iraqi civilians drop

Other News from Iraq:

United Kingdom to commence partial Iraq withdrawal
Al-Qaida confirms senior leader was killed in U.S. airstrike
New type of bomb is unexpectedly lethal in Iraq
Key Figures About Iraq

What do you think?
Does Blackwater belong in Iraq?
Read more!