14 minutes ago
HONG KONG (AFP)


World leaders urged a swift return to democracy and the rule of law after President Pervez Musharraf imposed emergency rule in Pakistan, although some allies stopped short of outright condemnation.

Musharraf -- a key US ally in the fight against Al-Qaeda and the Taliban -- declared a state of emergency late Saturday, fired the nation's top judge and suspended the constitution.

In a televised nationwide address, he cited Islamic extremism and judicial interference, saying terrorism in Pakistan was at its peak and the government was in "semi-paralysis" through the behaviour of the Supreme Court.

"This action is very disappointing," White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said in a statement.

"President Musharraf needs to stand by his pledges to have free and fair elections in January and step down as chief of army staff before retaking the presidential oath of office."

Another of Pakistan's closest allies, China, expressed concern over Musharraf's move.

"We are concerned about the situation in Pakistan, and believe the Pakistani government and people are capable of solving their problems," foreign ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao was quoted as telling the official Xinhua news agency.

The state of emergency throws into doubt parliamentary elections slated for January, as well as a power-sharing deal between Musharraf and former premier Benazir Bhutto, which Washington has been pushing for.

In his address, Musharraf spoke in English after addressing his countrymen in Urdu, saying he had a message for the world and Pakistan's "friends" in the United States, the European Union and the Commonwealth.

"Kindly understand the criticality of the situation in Pakistan and around Pakistan. Pakistan is on the verge of destabilisation," he said.

A Pentagon spokesman said Washington had no plans at this point to suspend military aid to Pakistan.

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said: "Whatever happens, we will be urging for a quick return to a constitutional order, we will be urging that the commitment to hold free and fair elections be kept and we would be urging calm among the parties."

In Britain, Pakistan's ex-colonial ruler, Foreign Secretary David Miliband called on the nation to harness "the power of democracy and the rule of law to achieve the goals of stability, development and countering terrorism."

"I am gravely concerned by the measures adopted today, which will take Pakistan further from these goals," said Miliband in a statement.

In Paris, the foreign ministry voiced French "concern" and urged Musharraf to "maintain the rule of law."

France "wants dialogue between all Pakistani political forces to guarantee stability and democracy in this great country, which is a partner and a friend," it said.

In Brussels, the European Union's executive arm voiced similar concern.

Commonwealth Secretary-General Don McKinnon said emergency rule "is a step in the wrong direction and a serious setback to democracy."

Pakistan was expelled from the 53-nation club for five years when Musharraf seized power in 1999.

Strong US ally Australia, which has troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, urged Pakistan to return to constitutional rule.

Foreign Minister Robert Downer acknowledged Pakistan, which shares a border with Afghanistan, faced difficult security challenges but said democratic processes needed to be maintained.

Reaction was more muted in India, Pakistan's neighbour and nuclear rival, its foreign ministry merely expressing "regrets" at Musharraf's move.

"We wish them stability and we look forward to conditions which will facilitate conditions for democracy to be restored in that country," said India's junior foreign minister Anand Sharma.

Musharraf's political rivals were unsparing in their criticism.

Bhutto told Britain's Sky News television that the country was regressing towards greater dictatorship, later telling CNN that Musharraf's move would only encourage extremists.

Another ex-premier, Nawaz Sharif, who was ousted by Musharraf in the 1999 coup, urged him to step down, telling the private Geo television Pakistan was heading towards chaos.

Opposition politician and cricket icon Imran Khan went further, suggesting Musharraf had committed treason, which was punishable by death.

What hasn't been reported
enough is that pro-Taliban
have seized 2 police stations
in Pakistan's Swat Valley,
a province with considerable
area.

I think Musharraf had to do
something to try to contain
the rebels.

Ask yourself:

What happens if the Taliban
takes over Pakistan?

Here's my scenario:

The supply lines to Afghanistan
get cut and the Taliban gets more
leverage in taking back power
in Afghanistan.

Does the United States
want that?

I don't believe the US wants that
but something has to give
if the Taliban get back in power the heroin trade will definately swing into high gear

You got that right.

I think it's paradoxical
that these so-called
'holy warriors'
use drugs to finance
their terrorist
activities.

How can they claim
to serve 'Allah'
this way?

I think maybe they're
confusing 'Allah'
with 'Satan'.

Not to mention
the scenario of
jihadists having
control of nuclear
missiles.

I don't think they
would hesitate a
moment to use them
where Musharraf would.

well there is no good news when it comes to dealing with Musharraf...

Can anyone say World War III?

Although Pak and India have nukes, I don't think it will be WW III.

And yeah, I know it's a state of emergency now...

...but I think WWIII is an overstatement.

I say this.
I am so friggin tired of the U,S. getting involved in crap we do not belong in. So here is food for thought. Let them nuke the hell outta each other and then we do not have to worry about it

That would be fine...but I think nukes affect us all.

Surprisingly a large number of people are not concerned about whether jihad groups have control of atomic weapons.

It would be the easy way out to accept such a scenario. Alas, the easy way is not always the prudent way.

I agree philosopher.

And I also agree with
Senator Joe Biden that
we've taken our eyes
off Afghanistan and
focused too much on
Iraq.

We have to be able to
fight terrorism wherever
it rears it's ugly head,
not just Iraq.

I've decided I don't know enough about the situation in Pakistan to take a stand pro or anti. It looks like a sticky wicket.

The question in my mind is, how much of Musharraf's action is necessary and how much is for his own personal aggrandizement.

Surely it is a good thing if the man maintains control, and his doing so keeps the military in secular hands. When a large number of the country's lawyers come out in opposition to his action and wind up in jail, other questions are raised.

In a country there must be some rule of law unless all the citizens are perfect and fair with their neighbors. Lawyers and legal organizations make up a large part of the structure which keeps the rule of law in place.

Law, unfortunately encompasses politics as well though. So there is the crux of the problem in understanding the situation there, for me. How much of the struggle between the legal system and Musharraf is political and how much is really necessary from a security standpoint? And are they actually the same or closely related in this case.

Good luck sorting this stuff out without some first hand knowledge.