Carla Neal/Feb 01/10:05/Democracy
A US human rights group is upset that President Bush is defending tyrannical leaders in other countries that are claiming to be democracies, the most recent being the leader of Pakistan. President Musharraf, under the illusion that he was “on the road” to a democracy, claimed emergency rule over his country, imprisoning many opposing citizens, interfering with press, and “undermining the law”. In response to this, President Bush said that Musharraf had not done anything wrong and that he was definitely on the way to establishing democracy. The HR group claims that there is a positive side to all of these leader’s claims that their countries are headed for democracy.
The positive side to this is these countries that have always thought of democracy as a bad thing, they are considering it and even defending it; however, they believe their country can be a democracy even if the leaders continue to rule in an authoritarian manner. While this does promote democracy to other countries, which is one of the goals of a democratic country, it does not promote human rights, which should be the main goal.
One probable reason why Bush is not confronting these leaders and instead he is defending them is because he feels that his job as a democracy leader has been accomplished, making others at least consider this democratic system; however, the HR group believes he can't really disagree with these leaders tactics because of the US operations in Guantanamo Bay. http://voanews.com/english/2008-01-31-voa68.cfm
1 comment:
Don't forget that about half of Palestinians believe, as do I, that Musharraf was behind the recent assassination of Benazir Bhutto. He is the one who had something to gain. He previously had worked out a "deal" with terrorist forces in his country, the upshot of which was that he would leave them alone for the most part and would also give them $400,000 dollars that they had all just remembered he "owed" them. Then Bhutto is killed, and the terrorist groups who are being blamed by Musharraf and the US are denying responsibility for it. Does that sound like the Al Qaeda we have all gotten to know and fear? But Musharraf is in charge of a powerful nuclear state (or has it become "nucular" in this dummed-down regime). Pakistan is in a position to, with nuclear force, attack our long-time ally Israel, or India or any other country he wants to in that area. He is willing to mouth the buzz-words of anti-terrorism, when it is well known what free rein terrorists enjoy in arts of Pakistan. Benazir Bhutto was the one who had a record of fighting terrorism successsfully; in my view this is part of the reason Musharraf could not afford to have her around...not to speak of her heretical desire for a free and democratic election, adhering to the rule of Pakistani law and the ruling of their Supreme Court. Further, the US State Department convinced Bhutto that she would be safe if she returned from her self-imposed exile; Condoleeza Rice gave her her word. As Mario Puzo says in The Godfather, "He who brings you the deal, he is the traitor." The corruption runs so deep...Condi Rice is becoming infamous to me for cutting deals and shaking hands with world leaders whose methods and ideologies are in direct contrast to our stated stance on human rights, democratic rule, and the welfare of the global community. See my next blog on Equatorial Guinea.
Post a Comment